Mercer
-
Posts
21,284 -
Joined
-
Days Won
237
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Everything posted by Mercer
-
Sexy AF
-
Could possibly be the wisest statement ever written on the internet.
-
More of a misunderstanding really. You have to understand the perspective of someone living in the US. We find guns are extremely useful tools here for a multitude of reasons. Unlike in most of Europe, many Americans live in rural areas, sometimes with large predators roaming about. Some Americans live in, need to travel through, and conduct business in high crime areas as well. Likewise It's much more common in America to be more than an hour away from any law enforcement showing up. The wise acknowledge we're all responsible for our own safety as individuals, relying on the government just isn't a realistic solution for most. Nothing excuses this responsibility we have for our safety (age, sex, race, etc.) which is why most of the people who choose to carry do so. Many of us in America feel like having the ability to go about our business unharmed, and without fear in our daily lives provides arguably the same freedom/convenience owning a vehicle does for many of us. Here is where you're failing to understand where we're coming from with that comparison. I think it's valid to use when even more people die from cars, and cars are used as tools to injure/kill large numbers of people by deranged individuals. This doesn't even touch on our sense of duty when it comes to defending our country. In Europe, this sense of duty is only associated with the Sate, whereas in America, many of us feel it's the responsibility of the individual to uphold freedom. We successfully fought a tyrannical government off that wanted to take away this right at the birth of our country. To many, this right to bear arms that we fought for, and won is more than just a useful tool like a car. For many of us, the ability to fight a tyrannical government is a core feature of our identity, and a major part of the foundation everything we stand for is built upon. This is where most of the confusion comes from. Guns do in fact serve a very important purpose, and role in many of our daily lives. Didn't come off like that at all. Most of us are in the same boat. One of the best things about this board is seeing other's perspectives.
-
Yes, 100%. I think better mental health is the best method to reduce violence. At the same time I think this is outside of the scope of the governments responsibilities. There are already background checks, and an entire slew of red tape required. As stated earlier. every pair of "wrong hands" starts out as a pair of "right hands" and legislation can't contol one set of hands turning into the other. Backgrounds checks are only effective up to a point, and will never be a fully reliable measure. Sort of correct, but even this is complicated. The majority of people considered "the right hands" legally, would immediately lose access. This reduced access would eventually trickle out to, and effect access for some "wrong hands" eventually, if there were less guns availiable overall. This doesn't stop the "wrong hands" for using other methods. Besides, people use cars, knives, their bare hands more often when there are less access to firearms making the matter even more complicated. Plus you have to factor in the real life gun violence these laws create when it ultimately leads to officers showing up to raid homes armed with guns. When weighed against the actual effect of gun control laws, which at best only reduce the potential for gun violence it just doesn't add up IMO.
-
The only real answer to this question is no, there's nothing responsible gun owners (or anyone else for that matter) can do. As much as we'd like there to be, there's just no simple answers. Even if responsible owners always have their weapons effectively locked away, and disabled (which many already do), they can't control the actions of "irresponsible owners". Likewise they can't control the actions of "the wrong hands", or control when a person who is normally "the right hands" randomly becomes the wrong hands. A responsible gun owner can only put an end to a "wrong hands" type of situation should it arise. Even passing a law outright banning the legal ownership of firearms will not effectively "curb" guns getting into the wrong hands. They can't even stop max security prisoners from having cocaine and cellphones. Besides, you can 3D print your own gun now without anyones's permission. More importantly, banning legal ownership does not translate into less murders, it only translates to less murders by firearms, when their accessibility access is squeezed out over time. Looking at places in the world where murder is most common, you'll see that legal firearm ownership by citizens plays an insignificant role overall.
-
F-14 Tomcat
-
They see me rollin...
-
Android Tactical Assault Kit (ATAK) software, U.S. Army's geospatial infrastructure and military situational awareness app.
-
-
@KILZ FILLZread. Weird, they canceled most of the orders for the F-22's because they discovered they were just too expensive. The F-35's lifetime operational costs are higher at 67,000 per flight hour, more than the F-22's at $60,000 per flight hour. They need to get this number down for the F-35's for it to be a viable replacement for everything they want it to eventually replace. It really is a jack of all trades. The ground mapping/360 sensor capabilities and electronic warfare/communications capabilities are insane.
