Because bump firing is silly. It is entertainment. I do other silly things, we all do, so I am not on a high horse here. Zero crimes - of course zero, there is no serious use (until that one schizo discovers it) By pointing at that, you would imply that the adult-style mainstream AR should be more of a problem, because mass murder has been committed using it. That's my reasoning. Draw a line, present yourself as reasonable, and you will be better listened to by the silent majority.
CNN again
- Thread starter RiverPerson
- Start date
- Status
MtnCreek
Member
When the '34 NFA was passed I was not around, but I assume most people were not interested in it or opposed to it. It only added a tax to firearms that were made for combat and gangsters, nothing that would affect the average citizen, right? But that's not the way to view infringement of rights. It should be viewed through the protections provided for in the Constitution / BOR's.
How about applying the same to the 1st amendment in the BOR's. IMO, Scientology is not a religion. Using your basis, why don't we allow a 'real' religion to go into the Scientology (Church, Temple, whatever it's called) and deny them their right to practice their belief? After all it's silly and made up by some sci-fi wacko.
Edit: No offence to Scientology meant. John Travolta seems like a nice guy.
How about applying the same to the 1st amendment in the BOR's. IMO, Scientology is not a religion. Using your basis, why don't we allow a 'real' religion to go into the Scientology (Church, Temple, whatever it's called) and deny them their right to practice their belief? After all it's silly and made up by some sci-fi wacko.
Edit: No offence to Scientology meant. John Travolta seems like a nice guy.
Outlaw Man
Member
That's like saying there's a relationship between car ownership and murders with a car or bow owners and arrow-related homicides. I'm pretty sure there's a good reason why people who don't have guns aren't shooting people, but I'm not a national news outlet, so what do I know?
I've seen junior high journalism classes put out better (and more well-written) stories than these clowns generally come out with.
I used to think they were just completely ignorant of firearms and their operation, but there are way too many subject matter experts out there who are eager to help them get the story straight.
But, then, they wouldn't have a story. When's the last time you saw a public interest piece on hammers or screwdrivers? We're doomed.
Things change, some for the better , some not so much. CNN is not so much. We used to watch news, not opinions. News men and women would tell the story. We would form an opinion.now it's all done for us depending on the network our news is formed. Warning to the young: we were gonna change the world, but didn't really look ahead. Now we have CNN.
Yesterday they blathered about machine guns suddenly becoming legal in Missouri if MO passed it's version of the "Fed, lay off our guns" law.
Machine guns are legal in many states and aren't specifically illegal federally. They're heavily regulated, but if you jump through the hoops and have a little luck, you can legally own a dozen of them.
And AFAIK, only two legally registered MG's have ever been used in crimes.
They do need to get some facts before they start reporting. Even just a few pro-gun guys on their fact-checking staff who actually know what the hell they're talking about could do them a lot of good.
Machine guns are legal in many states and aren't specifically illegal federally. They're heavily regulated, but if you jump through the hoops and have a little luck, you can legally own a dozen of them.
And AFAIK, only two legally registered MG's have ever been used in crimes.
They do need to get some facts before they start reporting. Even just a few pro-gun guys on their fact-checking staff who actually know what the hell they're talking about could do them a lot of good.
Last edited:
RiverPerson
Member
I don't think they care about getting all of the technical information right. They're after controversy because that is what brings viewers and money.
Ignorant folks will see the video and think "oh no! anyone can get a machine gun now!"
BlisteringSilence
Member
They at least stressed correlation is not causation. It was stated up front in the second paragraph. That's why I read AJ instead of CNN.
Here have an editor pick off the front page:
http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2013/9/10/the-easiest-solutionofall.html
Or an echo of some arguments you hear here:
http://america.aljazeera.com/articl...ontroldebateraisesechoesofsegregatedpast.html
Here have an editor pick off the front page:
http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2013/9/10/the-easiest-solutionofall.html
Or an echo of some arguments you hear here:
http://america.aljazeera.com/articl...ontroldebateraisesechoesofsegregatedpast.html
Bartholomew Roberts
Member
The other problem with the merl study is it fails to explain how homicide has dropped nationally as the total number of guns has increased in direct contradiction to the correlation they claim. Maybe their proxy for gun ownership (firearms suicides) isn't as valid as they think it is.
- Status
