- Breaking News -

[Triple Vacuum Seal]

 

And it's not just mass shootings which are the problem, the overall homicide rate and gun homicide rate is so extreme compared to other industrialised nations. As are other crimes such as armed robbery and violent crime.

This might have something to do with the sprawling urban ghettos that Americans don't seem too intent on doing anything about.

I'm not saying guns are the only issue here, there are clearly other factors involved. But guns are a very big part, the main part, of why America is so exceptional in relation to it's high crime and especially it's homicide rates. To me at least.

Not even close. I don't know where Europeans get off comparing the United States crime to other "industrialised nations". The criminal landscape here is and always has been on an entirely different level. That's the whole idea behind GTA always being based in the United States.

 

This is the most ethnically diverse nation for it's size with several sprawling cities everywhere you look with ghettos full of new gang recruits for every type of criminal organization. Not to mention the fact that these gangs are full of people looking for a "better" life from countries/cultures like El Salvador, Honduras, Mexico, Colombia, etc. where there is zero hesitation whatsoever in taking another human life (check their murder rates ). Central and Southern American crime organizations are among the most violent in the world (will kill over a few $) and are virtually nonexistent in Europe. Don't even get me started on the domestic exclusively African American street gangs, La Eme, ABN, Aryan Brotherhood, MS-13, Surenos, Bloods, Crips, the various biker gangs, and the cartels.

 

We also have an overly strict correction system (<5% of world's population in the US and >20% of the world's inmates) that reels non-violent offenders into a hell whole where they have to become hardened violent criminals and sometimes join gangs just to survive. Guns aren't the problem, it's our criminal landscape which I've only scratched the surface of in order to avoid a tl;dr post.

[Dingdongs]

 

They're not automatic for f*cks sake. I don't understand the fear of semi-automatic firearms in general, the least restricted class of guns in Canada still includes weapons that can be fired repeatedly, although with a mag limit of five rounds I think. It seems to me that most people own assault weapons for sport shooting or collecting, I imagine that a very high proportion of assault weapon owners are law abiding. In Canada you can even own an AR-15, although the process is fairly regulated.

 

I don't have any fear of semi-automatic weapons. That's not the point people are making in this thread - the point is that it doesn't matter if they are law abiding. They shouldn't have them in the first place. The person I spoke to was not using an AR-15, he was a West Virginian hunter who uses fully automatic weapons to KILL VARMINTS. That is "sport shooting" to this guy. If you do some research online you'll find that it is a very common phenonomen amongst American hunters to use fully automatic weapons to butcher varmints.

 

[lil weasel]

I don't have any fear of semi-automatic weapons. That's not the point people are making in this thread - the point is that it doesn't matter if they are law abiding. They shouldn't have them in the first place. The person I spoke to was not using an AR-15, he was a West Virginian hunter who uses fully automatic weapons to KILL VARMINTS. That is "sport shooting" to this guy. If you do some research online you'll find that it is a very common phenonomen amongst American hunters to use fully automatic weapons to butcher varmints.

Quite the Stretch. "Fully Automatic"? Do you know you have to buy a ATF "TAX Stamp (200$US)" to buy a Fully Automatic weapon?

Varmints = Rats, and other farm Vermin.

 

[Dingdongs]

I don't have any fear of semi-automatic weapons. That's not the point people are making in this thread - the point is that it doesn't matter if they are law abiding. They shouldn't have them in the first place. The person I spoke to was not using an AR-15, he was a West Virginian hunter who uses fully automatic weapons to KILL VARMINTS. That is "sport shooting" to this guy. If you do some research online you'll find that it is a very common phenonomen amongst American hunters to use fully automatic weapons to butcher varmints.

Quite the Stretch. "Fully Automatic"? Do you know you have to buy a ATF "TAX Stamp (200$US)" to buy a Fully Automatic weapon?

Varmints = Rats, and other farm Vermin.

Yes - that is what the guy shoots. He was a Vietnam vet and like I said, he told me it's quite common for hunters to do and I did some research myself and found he is correct. He said he does this with an M4A1 - which is a selective fire weapon and is, in fact, automatic.

 

[Saggy]

I don't have any fear of semi-automatic weapons. That's not the point people are making in this thread - the point is that it doesn't matter if they are law abiding. They shouldn't have them in the first place. The person I spoke to was not using an AR-15, he was a West Virginian hunter who uses fully automatic weapons to KILL VARMINTS. That is "sport shooting" to this guy. If you do some research online you'll find that it is a very common phenonomen amongst American hunters to use fully automatic weapons to butcher varmints.

Quite the Stretch. "Fully Automatic"? Do you know you have to buy a ATF "TAX Stamp (200$US)" to buy a Fully Automatic weapon?

Varmints = Rats, and other farm Vermin.

Yes - that is what the guy shoots. He was a Vietnam vet and like I said, he told me it's quite common for hunters to do and I did some research myself and found he is correct. He said he does this with an M4A1 - which is a selective fire weapon and is, in fact, automatic.

Irviding, link me to your findings. I believe the guy is talking out of his ass for two reasons...

 

1. Getting the licensing, extensive background checks and paying the taxes to get a license for a fully automatic weapon is extremely costly and takes quite a while

2. There are NO states that I know of which allow hunting with an automatic weapon

 

In addition, are you sure by "varmints" he means squirrels? A .223 caliber cartridge is over-kill of a squirrel, more likely to be used on raccoons, groundhogs, coyotes, hogs, etc. And as I've mentioned several times in this thread, when it comes to culling ferral hogs, having rapid firepower is an extreme asset.

 

In any case, if he really does use an M4 to hunt squirrels with on full auto, he's a f*cking nutcase and I'm afraid to think there really is a "trend" of this.

 

 

 

I also think people are confused by the phrase "gun culture." It doesn't mean guns are readily available, it's that Americans tend to see guns as an extension of themselves (the way people do with their cars, albeit in an infinitely more Freudian and bizarre way) and like the idea of killing someone with a gun - of helpless people being blown away by them with their huge, metal death-cock.

 

Man, your generalizations of why Americans like firearms really irritates me. Do you really assume everyone who owns a firearm is just a blood thirsty person massaging some sick, primal urge in them to kill? I own a .22 for TARGET shooting; meaning I shoot tiny little things out at far ranges, and get pleasure from being able to control a projectile traveling at a few thousand feet per second to do so--sometimes I use air rifles that aren't capable of killing anything but a sparrow to do this, but in order to shoot at further ranges I need a powdered propelled projectile. I don't get any satisfaction thinking, "Oh that would kill a guy! Awesome!"

 

 

And it's not just mass shootings which are the problem, the overall homicide rate and gun homicide rate is so extreme compared to other industrialised nations. As are other crimes such as armed robbery and violent crime.

 

Is Mexico not an industrialized nation? What about Brazil? Both have stricter gun laws than the U.S., with MUCH higher violent crime rates. I've seen a lot of people contend that comparing the U.S. to these nations is not appropriate, but why not? We have many of the same socioeconomic issues occurring in America--drug trade, gangs, racial and civil strife. So why are these countries regarded as inappropriate to compare the U.S. to?

 

Instead people compare our crime rate to Australia, Canada, the UK, etc. etc. Well that's all fine and dandy, but can you guys do me a favor and look up the statistics of drug crime and arrests in these countries? How about the number of youths in gangs? Unemployment? Yes the U.S. is one of the richest, most powerful countries in the world but in terms of our crime rate, we have more in common with turbulent nations like Mexico and Brazil than we do with Australia or the UK or what have you.

 

 

 

 

[Clem Fandango]

Man, your generalizations of why Americans like firearms really irritates me. Do you really assume everyone who owns a firearm is just a blood thirsty person massaging some sick, primal urge in them to kill?

No, but I think anyone who uses a machine gun to protect their home is just hoping some kid will brake in so they can blow them away like their favourite action movie heroes - or maybe they're just worried their house will be the first suburban home in history to be ransacked by an entire crime syndicate, but I somehow doubt that. Again, gun culture is not the same thing as "having lots of guns" a lot of Americans view guns as more than a tool, they view them as an appendage. There's a reason America has spree killings, action movies, gratuitous gun ownership and a massive military and the rest of the anglosphere doesn't.

[Triple Vacuum Seal]

Man, your generalizations of why Americans like firearms really irritates me.  Do you really assume everyone who owns a firearm is just a blood thirsty person massaging some sick, primal urge in them to kill?

No, but I think anyone who uses a machine gun to protect their home is just hoping some kid will brake in so they can blow them away like their favourite action movie heroes - or maybe they're just worried their house will be the first suburban home in history to be ransacked by an entire crime syndicate, but I somehow doubt that. Again, gun culture is not the same thing as "having lots of guns" a lot of Americans view guns as more than a tool, they view them as an appendage. There's a reason America has spree killings, action movies, gratuitous gun ownership and a massive military and the rest of the anglosphere doesn't.

You are talking 100% out of your ass. A non-gun-owning Australian explaining the mental make up of gun owners in a country on the other side of the Pacific whose culture you obviously know nothing about. Your credibility is near zero right now.

 

You think just because you watch the news, action movies, and gun crime statistics (all of which generally presented by the mass media), you know American gun culture? How many American gun owners do you know personally? To be frank, I don't know any like you described. However, with that arrogance, I guess you would fit in with many here in the US.

 

 

*Machine guns are illegal to the mass public here in the US too. AR-15 =/= machine gun. You need some new sources pal.

[Clem Fandango]

You are talking 100% out of your ass. A non-gun-owning Australian explaining the mental make up of gun owners in a country on the other side of the Pacific whose culture you obviously know nothing about. Your credibility is near zero right now.

 

You think just because you watch the news, action movies, and gun crime statistics (all of which generally presented by the mass media), you know American gun culture? How many American gun owners do you know personally? To be frank, I don't know any like you described. However, with that arrogance, I guess you would fit in with many here in the US.

Again, gun culture is not the same thing as the citizenry having access to weapons. Canada and Switzerland have guns coming out of the woodwork but they don't have a "gun culture." You failed miserably at understanding my contention, care to try again?

 

 

AR-15 =/= machine gun.

They are both equally gratuitous.

[lil weasel]

Canada and Switzerland have guns coming out of the woodwork [...]

Canada? I don't think so.

 

Switzerland... Why don't they have weapons problems?

[sivispacem]

 

Switzerland... Why don't they have weapons problems?

Because people are trained in their use, and undergo strict, frequent and rigorous assessment in order to remain part of the militia and in ownership of them. Open carry laws don't exactly hinder either.

 

If I remember rightly, if you ignore multiple firearm ownership by individuals a higher proportion of households in Switzerland are armed than in the US.

[agent17]

 

AR-15 =/= machine gun.

They are both equally gratuitous.[/color]

The shear accessibility and convenience of AR-15s and similar weapons is what makes it so appealing to consumers. They are relatively inexpensive and can be customized to your liking. If you need a general all-purpose weapon an AR will probably suit your needs.

 

I would argue however that assault weapons are too easily accessible. In my state for instance I could walk down the road and buy an AR-15 after a quick background check and walk out the store with it, but if I wanted to buy a simple handgun I would be sh*t out of luck without a pistol permit (which can take months to get).

[Triple Vacuum Seal]

You are talking 100% out of your ass. A non-gun-owning Australian explaining the mental make up of gun owners in a country on the other side of the Pacific whose culture you obviously know nothing about.  Your credibility is near zero right now.

 

You think just because you watch the news, action movies, and gun crime statistics (all of which generally presented by the mass media), you know American gun culture?  How many American gun owners do you know personally?  To be frank, I don't know any like you described.  However, with that arrogance, I guess you would fit in with many here in the US.

Again, gun culture is not the same thing as the citizenry having access to weapons. Canada and Switzerland have guns coming out of the woodwork but they don't have a "gun culture." You failed miserably at understanding my contention, care to try again?

 

 

AR-15 =/= machine gun.

They are both equally gratuitous.

As I pointed out already, you've failed miserably in understanding how guns integrate into American culture. You covered up that misunderstanding with an offensive generalization of American gun owners. Simple and plain.

 

For one, machine guns are far more deadly than semi-auto AR-15s, so maybe you should look beyond movies and video games for insight on the differences in rifles. So no, they are not equally gratuitous. Not even close.

[Clem Fandango]

As I pointed out already, you've failed miserably in understanding how guns integrate into American culture.

Oh? So if I'm wrong in my assessment that people glorify guns in fiction and people shoot up schools because the culture imprints the idea that guns are a power-lending appendage, would you care to provide an alternate explanation? Why do Americans love action movies, why do they shoot up schools?

 

Also, I never said all Americans feel this way. I'm sure plenty of American gun owners just want to protect themselves, though I won't concede that they aren't paranoid to the point of total delusion - "oh I live in a city but I don't want to get rolled for my phone so I'll just walk around with a f*cking gun."

 

 

For one, machine guns are far more deadly than semi-auto AR-15s, so maybe you should look beyond movies and video games for insight on the differences in rifles. So no, they are not equally gratuitous.

I never said they were equal in power or speed or whatever, I said they were equally gratuitous. "Gratuitous" in this context means "unnecessary" and yes, they are indeed equally unnecessary. You don't need a rifle.

[Triple Vacuum Seal]

 

As I pointed out already, you've failed miserably in understanding how guns integrate into American culture.

Oh? So if I'm wrong in my assessment that people glorify guns in fiction and people shoot up schools because the culture imprints the idea that guns are a power-lending appendage, would you care to provide an alternate explanation? Why do Americans love action movies, why do they shoot up schools?

 

Also, I never said all Americans feel this way. I'm sure plenty of American gun owners just want to protect themselves, though I won't concede that they aren't paranoid to the point of total delusion - "oh I live in a city but I don't want to get rolled for my phone so I'll just walk around with a f*cking gun."

 

 

For one, machine guns are far more deadly than semi-auto AR-15s, so maybe you should look beyond movies and video games for insight on the differences in rifles. So no, they are not equally gratuitous.

I never said they were equal in power or speed or whatever, I said they were equally gratuitous. "Gratuitous" in this context means "unnecessary" and yes, they are indeed equally unnecessary. You don't need a rifle.

 

- I never said American fiction doesn't glorify guns. You just confuse American pop culture with reality like many foreigners making evaluations about the US.

 

- Most American gun owners don't carry their guns around the city. Another blind generalization just made.

 

- Owning a weapon doesn't make you delusional. Many Americans will likely find themselves in a situation at least once in their life where it would have been very beneficial to be armed. Being a particularly adventurous fellow, I'm only 19 and have already had at least 20 of these instances. Civilians carry guns here because our criminals aren't afraid to shoot. *Keep in mind that people who menace you in a dangerous area with a weapon may even be under the influence of a drug such as alcohol.*

 

- Now we've dissected your claims to the point where your entire argument hinges on the lack of "need". We don't need 99% of the things around us here in the first world (including GTA). Lack of "need" doesn't make something inappropriate.

[Saggy]

As I pointed out already, you've failed miserably in understanding how guns integrate into American culture.

Oh? So if I'm wrong in my assessment that people glorify guns in fiction and people shoot up schools because the culture imprints the idea that guns are a power-lending appendage, would you care to provide an alternate explanation? Why do Americans love action movies, why do they shoot up schools?

 

Also, I never said all Americans feel this way. I'm sure plenty of American gun owners just want to protect themselves, though I won't concede that they aren't paranoid to the point of total delusion - "oh I live in a city but I don't want to get rolled for my phone so I'll just walk around with a f*cking gun."

 

 

For one, machine guns are far more deadly than semi-auto AR-15s, so maybe you should look beyond movies and video games for insight on the differences in rifles. So no, they are not equally gratuitous.

I never said they were equal in power or speed or whatever, I said they were equally gratuitous. "Gratuitous" in this context means "unnecessary" and yes, they are indeed equally unnecessary. You don't need a rifle.

Are you just going to continue to ignore the merit a rifle has in the hands of a farmer who needs to control pest populations? I don't know how many times I've mentioned feral hogs...

 

As far as the whole, Americans love violent movies and to shoot up schools... Are we the only nation that watches violent movies? We're certainly not the only nation that has mass shootings like this, albeit it's more common here.

[Triple Vacuum Seal]

As I pointed out already, you've failed miserably in understanding how guns integrate into American culture.

Oh? So if I'm wrong in my assessment that people glorify guns in fiction and people shoot up schools because the culture imprints the idea that guns are a power-lending appendage, would you care to provide an alternate explanation? Why do Americans love action movies, why do they shoot up schools?

 

Also, I never said all Americans feel this way. I'm sure plenty of American gun owners just want to protect themselves, though I won't concede that they aren't paranoid to the point of total delusion - "oh I live in a city but I don't want to get rolled for my phone so I'll just walk around with a f*cking gun."

 

 

For one, machine guns are far more deadly than semi-auto AR-15s, so maybe you should look beyond movies and video games for insight on the differences in rifles. So no, they are not equally gratuitous.

I never said they were equal in power or speed or whatever, I said they were equally gratuitous. "Gratuitous" in this context means "unnecessary" and yes, they are indeed equally unnecessary. You don't need a rifle.

Are you just going to continue to ignore the merit a rifle has in the hands of a farmer who needs to control pest populations? I don't know how many times I've mentioned feral hogs...

 

As far as the whole, Americans love violent movies and to shoot up schools... Are we the only nation that watches violent movies? We're certainly not the only nation that has mass shootings like this, albeit it's more common here.

Exactly. The anti-gun folks hate when I bring this one up...

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Norway_attacks

[sivispacem]

- Now we've dissected your claims to the point where your entire argument hinges on the lack of "need". We don't need 99% of the things around us here in the first world (including GTA). Lack of "need" doesn't make something inappropriate.

I have to come back to this. I've already discussed the "need" aspect of firearms and questioned the usefulness of semi-automatic rifles in just about any given home or personal defence situation; as well as questioning their value as conventional weapons for the purposes of hunting. Now, I get the idea that firearms are fun; I mean, they just are, right? I've shot before, and yes, it's fun. is that the only meaningful justification for the possession of semi-automatic intermediate-calibre carbines? That they're "fun" to shoot with? That's fair enough, I'm just asking the question is that the only reasonable use for a semi-automatic carbine as it's inferior to other more practical kinds of weapon in every other scenario, aside from shooting man-sized targets en masse.

[Saggy]

 

- Now we've dissected your claims to the point where your entire argument hinges on the lack of "need".  We don't need 99% of the things around us here in the first world (including GTA).  Lack of "need" doesn't make something inappropriate.

I have to come back to this. I've already discussed the "need" aspect of firearms and questioned the usefulness of semi-automatic rifles in just about any given home or personal defence situation; as well as questioning their value as conventional weapons for the purposes of hunting. Now, I get the idea that firearms are fun; I mean, they just are, right? I've shot before, and yes, it's fun. is that the only meaningful justification for the possession of semi-automatic intermediate-calibre carbines? That they're "fun" to shoot with? That's fair enough, I'm just asking the question is that the only reasonable use for a semi-automatic carbine as it's inferior to other more practical kinds of weapon in every other scenario, aside from shooting man-sized targets en masse.

Argh! How many times do I have to mention pest control? Seriously...

 

And no, pest control is not the same as hunting. When you hunt, you want to kill ONE animal. When you control pests, you want to kill as many as you can.

 

Edit:

 

But I don't think it would be a huge problem for land owners/farmers to have to get a permit to use these weapons.

[Triple Vacuum Seal]

- Now we've dissected your claims to the point where your entire argument hinges on the lack of "need".  We don't need 99% of the things around us here in the first world (including GTA).  Lack of "need" doesn't make something inappropriate.

I have to come back to this. I've already discussed the "need" aspect of firearms and questioned the usefulness of semi-automatic rifles in just about any given home or personal defence situation; as well as questioning their value as conventional weapons for the purposes of hunting. Now, I get the idea that firearms are fun; I mean, they just are, right? I've shot before, and yes, it's fun. is that the only meaningful justification for the possession of semi-automatic intermediate-calibre carbines? That they're "fun" to shoot with? That's fair enough, I'm just asking the question is that the only reasonable use for a semi-automatic carbine as it's inferior to other more practical kinds of weapon in every other scenario, aside from shooting man-sized targets en masse.

They (semi-auto AR-15 carbines) are in fact superior in many ways though. There are reasons why this gun design is so common.

 

-less recoil than most other firearms by far

-very customizable

-relatively light weight

-cheap ammo

-comfortable to fire

-widely used throughout the world, therefore it's a highly supported weapon system

 

*just to name a few

[Clem Fandango]

 

- I never said American fiction doesn't glorify guns.

And this is gun culture.

 

 

You just confuse American pop culture with reality like many foreigners making evaluations about the US.

Are you really going to assert that culture is not a reliable indicator of widely held attitudes?

 

 

- Most American gun owners don't carry their guns around the city. Another blind generalization just made.

And keeping your gun at home to fend off burglars seems equally paranoid.

 

 

Many Americans will likely find themselves in a situation at least once in their life where it would have been very beneficial to be armed. Being a particularly adventurous fellow, I'm only 19 and have already had at least 20 of these instances. Civilians carry guns here because our criminals aren't afraid to shoot

You think you're going to get into a fire-fight with an armed criminal and come out on top? May I suggest just giving him your wallet...

 

 

Now we've dissected your claims to the point where your entire argument hinges on the lack of "need". We don't need 99% of the things around us here in the first world (including GTA). Lack of "need" doesn't make something inappropriate

And what is your point exactly? My whole point is that people are inclined to arm themselves due to certain undesirable cultural attitudes, not that gun-ownership itself is inherently harmful. I'm not saying "give up everything you don't need" I'm merely pointing out certain attitudes and how they manifest in undesirable ways.

 

 

Are you just going to continue to ignore the merit a rifle has in the hands of a farmer who needs to control pest populations? I don't know how many times I've mentioned feral hogs...

And how is that at all relevant? I never said rifles should be banned as long as people who wield them demonstrate adeptness and mental competence, merely that they are gratuitous for protecting your home, thus their prevalence can be taken as a sign of unwanted societal trends, namely the desire to kill due to a glorification of firearms and paranoia.

 

 

Are we the only nation that watches violent movies?

Other cultures tend not to produce films that are simply displays of violence. People in other countries do indeed watch action movies.. American action movies. I feel my contention is fairly uncontroversial.

 

 

We're certainly not the only nation that has mass shootings like this, albeit it's more common here.

The frequency of these events in the US is shocking. Most countries have only one such event to speak of in their entire history, America has had two this year alone. It's clearly not a coincidence - it's the result of something in American society that needs to be identified, explored and dismantled.

[Saggy]

 

- Now we've dissected your claims to the point where your entire argument hinges on the lack of "need".  We don't need 99% of the things around us here in the first world (including GTA).  Lack of "need" doesn't make something inappropriate.

I have to come back to this. I've already discussed the "need" aspect of firearms and questioned the usefulness of semi-automatic rifles in just about any given home or personal defence situation; as well as questioning their value as conventional weapons for the purposes of hunting. Now, I get the idea that firearms are fun; I mean, they just are, right? I've shot before, and yes, it's fun. is that the only meaningful justification for the possession of semi-automatic intermediate-calibre carbines? That they're "fun" to shoot with? That's fair enough, I'm just asking the question is that the only reasonable use for a semi-automatic carbine as it's inferior to other more practical kinds of weapon in every other scenario, aside from shooting man-sized targets en masse.

They (semi-auto AR-15 carbines) are in fact superior in many ways though. There are reasons why this gun design is so common.

 

-less recoil than most other firearms by far

-very customizable

-relatively light weight

-cheap ammo

-comfortable to fire

-widely used throughout the world, therefore it's a highly supported weapon system

 

*just to name a few

Well, that doesn't really answer why an intermediate caliber. A .22 caliber auto-loading rifle such as a Ruger 10/22 meets all the criteria you listed. I think what really needs to be defended is the merit of the .223 cartridge.

 

Outside of pest control, the biggest reason I see people wanting a .223 is for the flat trajectory and to shoot to more intermediate ranges than what's possible with a .22 Not to get too much into technical gun talk, but one could argue at this point that a .17 or a .22 WMR rifle would suffice for that purpose as well.

 

But that is when I ask... What would be the point? The .22 LR cartridge is still highly lethal, and the .22 WMR has about the same ballistic energy as a .38 caliber pistol... Compared to other cartridges, the .22 LR is at the bottom rung on the ladder, but when people basically start asking the question "Why a cartrdige as deadly as this?" I just have to wonder why a .22 should be seem as any more acceptable.

 

And before someone contends that a .22 would not be chosen, nor would be effective in a massacre...

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumbria_massacre

 

I really don't see why the AR-15 platform is so popular. I mean, as far as its merit for using the .223 round goes, there are a lot of people that actually convert their AR-15s to fire .22 LR. So what is the point? If you're going to spend the money on a semi-automatic rifle and you're satisfied with a .22, then why an AR-15? Surely the Ruger 10/22 would meet every bit of criteria on your list...

 

Except that the Ruger doesn't have a pistol grip, or tons of rails to hang flashlights and every accessory a person could think of off the thing... I think it's kind of hard to deny that there is a certain segment of the population that just likes the idea of shooting a military-style weapon.

[agent17]

-less recoil than most other firearms by far

-very customizable

-relatively light weight

-cheap ammo

-comfortable to fire

-widely used throughout the world, therefore it's a highly supported weapon system

 

*just to name a few

This, coupled with the sheer amount of customization gives very little incentive to buy anything else.

 

I personally own a .22 AR-15, at just 9 cents a round it's well worth it (just over $2 to fill the mag), especially if you plan on doing any target practice.

[Meekail]

You just know somewhere some director or production studio is already making a movie script for this, oh and check this out, someone made an actual game out of another school shooting, very disrespectful........

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=playe...d&v=KTYkdRLdSSA

[Triple Vacuum Seal]

 

- I never said American fiction doesn't glorify guns.

And this is gun culture.

 

 

You just confuse American pop culture with reality like many foreigners making evaluations about the US.

Are you really going to assert that culture is not a reliable indicator of widely held attitudes?

 

 

- Most American gun owners don't carry their guns around the city. Another blind generalization just made.

And keeping your gun at home to fend off burglars seems equally paranoid.

 

 

Many Americans will likely find themselves in a situation at least once in their life where it would have been very beneficial to be armed. Being a particularly adventurous fellow, I'm only 19 and have already had at least 20 of these instances. Civilians carry guns here because our criminals aren't afraid to shoot

You think you're going to get into a fire-fight with an armed criminal and come out on top? May I suggest just giving him your wallet...

 

 

Now we've dissected your claims to the point where your entire argument hinges on the lack of "need". We don't need 99% of the things around us here in the first world (including GTA). Lack of "need" doesn't make something inappropriate

And what is your point exactly? My whole point is that people are inclined to arm themselves due to certain undesirable cultural attitudes, not that gun-ownership itself is inherently harmful. I'm not saying "give up everything you don't need" I'm merely pointing out certain attitudes and how they manifest in undesirable ways.

 

 

Are you just going to continue to ignore the merit a rifle has in the hands of a farmer who needs to control pest populations? I don't know how many times I've mentioned feral hogs...

And how is that at all relevant? I never said rifles should be banned as long as people who wield them demonstrate adeptness and mental competence, merely that they are gratuitous for protecting your home, thus their prevalence can be taken as a sign of unwanted societal trends, namely the desire to kill due to a glorification of firearms and paranoia.

 

 

Are we the only nation that watches violent movies?

Other cultures tend not to produce films that are simply displays of violence. People in other countries do indeed watch action movies.. American action movies. I feel my contention is fairly uncontroversial.

 

 

We're certainly not the only nation that has mass shootings like this, albeit it's more common here.

The frequency of these events in the US is shocking. Most countries have only one such event to speak of in their entire history, America has had two this year alone. It's clearly not a coincidence - it's the result of something in American society that needs to be identified, explored and dismantled.

In order...

 

- Guns in American fiction isn't our gun culture. It's the exciting/profitable way of portraying it.

 

- Pop culture as you know it is American culture reinterpreted, recreated, an repackaged by massive media conglomerates (for profit) and shat back out to you. Good luck trying to make accurate analysis of our gun policy/culture from that.

 

- Keeping guns at home is equally paranoid? Tell me, where else do you think a gun owner should keep his/her firearms other than locked away at home where no one else can get to them (including the government and mentally ill "kids").

 

- You just formulated one of the thousands of self-defense scenarios that best fit your argument. However, you just inadvertently proved my point. People (including the criminals) suddenly "act right" when they see you're armed.

 

- Don't really understand what you are trying to say there.

 

- Rifles aren't "gratuitous" for protecting your home. Extra magazine capacity (to answer SagaciousKJB's post as well) in addition to all of the reasons in my previous post are why you have the upper hand. It's funny how people are saying AR-15s are too much of a threat to human life, yet they call the gun inferior. Mind-boggling.

 

- "Other cultures tend not to produce films that are simply displays of violence." You must have never seen any Japanese movies. Those movies have senseless violence out the ass. Some Japanese movies are pure violence from the first scene to the last.

 

- I agree here. Except for the "shocking" part. Unacceptable, yes. Shocking, no. The overall threat of death by mass shootings to Americans (more than 312 million people) is blown out of proportion considering how rare they are. America has a lot of spoiled butthurt dwellers with no life, no social skills, and who are heavily/overly medicated just itching for attention; even if it means being notorious. That mixed with a gun-owning culture = occasional mass shootings. It's been "identified" there. We just need to "explore" the issue beyond guns for a change.

[Celticfang]

I'll throw this out there. I've said before I've been to Mass (I stay near Springfield a lot) but what I haven't said is I've spent quite a lot of time in Idaho and Washington, two states that you'd expect to be very into gun culture.

 

Let's test that shall we?

 

Idaho Falls, nope. Okay, the person I stayed with slept with a gun under their pillow because they'd been robbed and legally owned a 9mm pistol for self defense. I asked about it and got told that's all he needed, didn't see a point in a rifle or anything bigger than a 9mm. But as a whole, most people weren't carrying a gun at all (though okay Idaho's a strange state regardless) and they seemed to have more in common with the Canadian mindset about guns than the US (See, odd state)

 

Vancouver, WA. My ex-friend made a very good point about guns. They are as much a status symbol as a weapon, much like a car is. If you walk around with the knowledge you own and can use a rifle (it doesn't matter what kind), you have a certain status or image as opposed to a .38 pistol.

 

Having said that, two NASCAR drivers decided to prove a point with the whole gratuitous thing by stating they want to buy tanks to play around in (Dale Jr and Brad Kesolowski)

 

I'm not going to get into a whole pop culture vs culture debate, but I think that the US (among other countries) needs to take a long, hard look at the entertainment industry. Why exactly does it glorify guns and violence? What exactly is the point of it anyone?

Edited December 21, 2012 by Celticfang

[sivispacem]

They (semi-auto AR-15 carbines) are in fact superior in many ways though. There are reasons why this gun design is so common.

 

-less recoil than most other firearms by far

-very customizable

-relatively light weight

-cheap ammo

-comfortable to fire

-widely used throughout the world, therefore it's a highly supported weapon system

 

*just to name a few

- No less than any small-calibre semi-automatic, and barely less than an equivalent bolt action.

- A product of popularity. The existence of so many drop in parts is a product of the weapon's popularity. Plenty of modular bolt actions too.

- Not as light as a .223 bolt action, or even many .308s.

- Same applies to any .223 weapon.

- Again, as a hunting weapon I would argue less comfortable than a traditionally stocked rifle. Pistol grips are great for rapid target acquisition but nowhere near as comfy for prolonged carrying.

- Only really in the US and Canada. Not a particularly popular platform out of military use elsewhere.

 

Oh, and in relation to the Cumbria shootings, my understanding is that virtually all the casualties were killed with a shotgun.

[Triple Vacuum Seal]

 

They (semi-auto AR-15 carbines) are in fact superior in many ways though.  There are reasons why this gun design is so common.

 

-less recoil than most other firearms by far

-very customizable

-relatively light weight

-cheap ammo

-comfortable to fire

-widely used throughout the world, therefore it's a highly supported weapon system

 

*just to name a few

- No less than any small-calibre semi-automatic, and barely less than an equivalent bolt action.

- A product of popularity. The existence of so many drop in parts is a product of the weapon's popularity. Plenty of modular bolt actions too.

- Not as light as a .223 bolt action, or even many .308s.

- Same applies to any .223 weapon.

- Again, as a hunting weapon I would argue less comfortable than a traditionally stocked rifle. Pistol grips are great for rapid target acquisition but nowhere near as comfy for prolonged carrying.

- Only really in the US and Canada. Not a particularly popular platform out of military use elsewhere.

 

Oh, and in relation to the Cumbria shootings, my understanding is that virtually all the casualties were killed with a shotgun.

I forgot to mention that it also provides a great magazine capacity.

 

Don't you think it's safe to say that a pretty decent chunk of the world's legal rifles owners are in the US and Canada? There's no denying that it's a very well supported weapon system or any of the positives I've mentioned regarding this platform. You may not like the gun much yourself; and I respect that opinion given your extensive explanations. However, it's one of the US' most popular guns for a reason.

 

It's a well-designed and well-liked gun in America that should not be banned just because those who shoot up our schools tend to like them as well. Any other gun with the same magazine capacity would've been suitable for this gunman to kill as many children as he did. Out of all of the carbines on the market, the AR-15 platform being specifically targeted by the media and politicians as an "assault rifle" is pure ignorance. They want to ban the design while disregarding the performance of the weapon; which is bad gun policy/regulation no matter what side of the issue you stand on.

[El Dildo]

could anyone tell me why you actually need an AR-15?

 

because you don't need one for hunting or target shooting.

[FAH-Q]

could anyone tell me why you actually need an AR-15?

 

because you don't need one for hunting or target shooting.

Well for when that small army shows up at your front door, of course.

[Saggy]

could anyone tell me why you actually need an AR-15?

 

because you don't need one for hunting or target shooting.

Hey congratulations on ignoring the last two pages of the topic El_Diablo and CallTheCoroner...

 

 

1. Pest control of coyote, ferral hogs and other mid to large sized pests is much more effective with an AR-15

2. Target shooting ( as if you know a thing about it ) is done at many different ranges and on many different targets. A .223 cartridge provides flatter trajectory for targets within 100 yards, and also enables the shooting to shoot targets at 200-300 yards ( which wouldn't be very possible with a .22 LR ).

 

You'd be better off asking why anyone needs a semi-automatic for target shooting. But with that in mind, why does anyone need a .22 caliber semi-automatic rifle? Because they're more fun for plinking.