Ak's Axes And Nukes

[gamesfanatic04]

We need tighter broadsword control.

[Deb]

........and flatulence control.

[jeffpugh]

[quote name='gamesfanatic04' post='1459073' date='Feb 10 2008, 11:57 PM']We need tighter broadsword control.[/quote]
Totally. And foreign blades like Katanas are readily accessible on line

[dairygirl4u2c]

[url="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/niu_shooting"]http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/niu_shooting[/url]

notice another shooting. and the last thing anyone is going to say is student's need access to AKs and machine guns. a pistol would fix the situation. free access to AKs etc would simply allow many of them, and instead of four dead, it'd be 20.
AKs etc are far and away really not needed by ordinary citizenry, and i have not been shown anything to the otherwise.
i think deep down spam knows this if he's willing to admit it.

[KnightofChrist]

Unless of course everyone was armed, and when an evil person tried to murder innocent people, the people killed the murderer.

[jeffpugh]

I'm thinking about the kind of world we live in where people have to walk to class with an AK47 on hand. Think about what that would do to our minds... how could someone genuinely trust another person without their security weapon? And seeing everyone sit at their desk w/ with their gun close at hand... and btw, whats the power of these bullets? would it go through someone if you shot them on a campus pathway? I mean, how much damage could these arms cause?


Anywho, call me a coward or what ever, but I'm not getting in this argument, I'm just speculating here... throwing ideas out. Take it or leave it.

Edited February 15, 2008 by Sacred Music Man

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' post='1463335' date='Feb 15 2008, 11:25 AM']I'm thinking about the kind of world we live in where people have to walk to class with an AK47 on hand. Think about what that would do to our minds... how could someone genuinely trust another person without their security weapon?[/quote]

Evil triumphs when good men do nothing. I'm thinking of a world in reality, one with more and more gun control and innocent and law obeying people giving up their guns, in which evil wicked men take advantage. With all the school shootings as of late, the idea of the good students being able to arm themselves with at least a sidearm seems more practical.

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' post='1463335' date='Feb 15 2008, 11:25 AM']And seeing everyone sit at their desk w/ with their gun close at hand... and btw, whats the power of these bullets? would it go through someone if you shot them on a campus pathway? I mean, how much damage could these arms cause?[/quote]

But which would be better to see? That, or seeing defenseless dead and dying students on school grounds because they could not protect themselves from a wicked murderer. It would be practical to train the students in gun safety, and again I am not speaking of arming students with AK's but at least a select trusted number of them with rhandguns. I know that sounds crazy, but in all of the cases where students have been shot at school, if the innocent ones could shoot back there would have been fewer innocents death, and quicker stop to the rampage.

Edited February 15, 2008 by KnightofChrist

[dairygirl4u2c]

i didn't make it clear in my last post. but i agree letting them have arms is the solution, but only pistols.

having AKs etc is only going to allow people to go on rampage. people will die before they're taken down even if others had AKs. plus realisitically, people are not going to carry around AKs. they might pistols at best. so allowing AKs will only do harm, and not good.

it's fun when my adament hardcore friends say these incidents indicate the need for free gun access for protection. fun, because i agree... then go on to say but it also shows that AKs etc are not needed. they've always been flabergasted when i make that statement, cause msot people are mindless extremes on the issue, and so they didn't know how to respond.
as far as i can tell... they would never know how to respond either, cause there's no decent arguemnts against it that i have seen.

[KnightofChrist]

I would agree that a AK is not something one should just walk around with. However I do believe as explain in the NRA board, that individuals have a right to them. And even if normal people carried AK's that is not going to convert them to crazy. Most americans are normal and can be trusted, least thats what I believe, and just because they are given or buy a AK doesnt at all mean their billy the kid, or a Clyde.

Edited February 15, 2008 by KnightofChrist

[dairygirl4u2c]

one other things... if a person had an AK to defend.. it's not like you needed it to begin with. so, the idea of using AKs as defense even if they had the gun and used it doesn't really make sense.
except in ,0000001 percent of the cases. so rare as to be statistically zero.

i would say that normal people could have them, ideally.
but, i don't think the deaths that would occur with them justifies having them.

for once, i'd like a pro gun person to admit they're willing to allow more deaths that the AK would surely cause... in order to allow people to have the guns.

it's the only posistion that seems consistent/ or at least honest.

[Red Knight]

So, based on what I'm reading, no one should own a rifle. Tha's what I'm hearing. An AK47 (junk in my personal opinion) is nothing more than a rifle. So what if it's automatic. Firing on full auto, even for well trained peole is very ineffective at what are known as point targets (people). So I go into a room and start spraying, if I have a 30 round magazine maybe I have 15 hits, depending on the density of people in the room.

If I have my rifle on semi-auto and a 30 round magazine, I'm looking at maybe 20 to 28 hits. It is actually far easier to take well aimed shots quickly than to hit acurately with auto.

In my mind that example negates the whole ban automatic weapons concept.

Now, if I had a Browning M2 .50 Caliber Machine Gun on my car, that would be far different. A matter of scale considering I could take out carloads of people with very few rounds.

I think the public focuses too easily on the glamour of gun deaths. As was pointed out earlier far more people die of other causes, but "We NEED to do something about GUN DEATHS!"

Guns, of all varieties, are nothing more than tools. They are designed to kill, whether it be humans or animals, it is the psychology of the killer you should be worried about, not the tool they use.

Ted Bundy never once used a gun to kill. Neither did the Green River Killer if I remember correctly. Between the two of them 50+ people lost their lives.

BTW, if I could bring my M9 Semi-auto Pistol and M16 Rifle home with me in between drill weekends, I'd be a happy camper.

[Deb]

The first time I ever went into the ocean, I walked in a few feet very slowly as I was kind of scared. A crab crabbed on to my big toe. I could have used an AK-47 that day! Shaking him off was a trip. Here is a photo of the crab. I sold him to these people.



[img]http://seagrant.uaf.edu/news/06news/images/crab-rehab/sara-brad-200.jpg[/img]

[dairygirl4u2c]

well i admit i don't know hte mechanics of how automatics shoot very well, and that could change my position if i had a better grasp.

and, if someone were to just start spraying aimlyessly, a pistol probably would cause just as much of a problem.

but, it seems like if it's done right, you could just point at one person and then the other jsut as you would wiht a pistol, making it at least as efective as a pistol, and all the sprying in the mean time is just icing on the cake, and necessarily more than a pistol could do.