Opinion piece in today's NYT

[Darrell]

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/04/opinion/nashville-shooting-guns

 

This is worth a read, I think, as it gives us an idea of what the anti-gun crowd are thinking.  The comments section makes me nuts, but what else can one expect from NYT readers? (I must admit, though, that I read it, too.)

[Chucktshoes]

Seems to be a pretty run-of-the-mill fudd take. “I am a hunter who owns guns, but nobody needs an AR-15.“”

As far as the comments go, they’re the same regurgitated, talking points of people who have no experience with firearms or understanding of the context, in which the second amendment was written.

[Alleycat72]

I hunt with an AR probably 90% of the time.  LOL

[BigK]

If nobody ever used an AR-15 or any gun they think is black and scary in a crime, I think they'd still go after them. I suspect they see what they call assault style weapons as low-hanging fruit that they can use to start disarming the masses.

[Frog4aday]

Game plan is the same as always - outlaw guns at every opportunity. Never let a mass shooting go by w/o taking more rights away. @BigK has it correct; the AR bans = low hanging fruit. They won't stop there. Look @ Great Britain, Australia, & now New Zealand for the playbook end goal results. And once everything is banned & crime is worse than ever, to include murder, it's too late. You'll never get your rights back.

You can vote yourself into Socialism/Communism/Dictatorship but you can only escape from that by shooting your way back out of it. Gun control is really just "control"...period.

History shows that giving up rights for 'safety' leaves you with neither. Sadly the masses have been sold an easy fix to stop mass murderers in the siren call of gun control. By the time it dawns on the average person that it was all a lie, it's too late.

The NYT is just rough toilet paper. It's good for lining a bird cage. Sadly people are reading it thinking there is still something of value there.

[m16ty]

I have yet to find statistics on how many people are killed each year with "assault weapons". You would think with all the talk of banning them somebody would have compiled the statistics. I will submit they have, but they didn't like the results, so they don't release them. 

Only thing I can find is for 2019 and it list a total of 13,922 homicides, of which 364 were committed with rifles. Now if you break that down to homicides committed by "assault rifles", I'd say the number would be a fraction of 364. Since we don't have the data on what they call "assault weapons", lets go ahead and give them the 364 number and assume every rifle murder was from the barrel of a AR-15. Ask your gun grabbing "friends", lets say we get rid of every gun you call a "assault weapon" from the whole U.S., ok you've prevented 364 deaths, but what are you going to do about the other 13,558? 

When confronted about a new "assault weapon ban", I have never got a answer to the question and that will shut them up, because they don't have an answer. 

This also goes to show you that banning what they call "assault weapons" will do nothing to stop murders. Even if you stopped every murder committed my all rifles, you would only decrease murders by less than 0.03%. The reality is though, the actual murders by "assault weapons" are much less than that 364 number, and most people that did commit murders by what they call "assault weapons" would just use something else. Then you add the fact that by banning them you'll never actually get rid of them, it's a non issue that will change nothing. 

[BigK]

38 minutes ago, m16ty said:

I have yet to find statistics on how many people are killed each year with "assault weapons". You would think with all the talk of banning them somebody would have compiled the statistics. I will submit they have, but they didn't like the results, so they don't release them. 

Only thing I can find is for 2019 and it list a total of 13,922 homicides, of which 364 were committed with rifles. Now if you break that down to homicides committed by "assault rifles", I'd say the number would be a fraction of 364. Since we don't have the data on what they call "assault weapons", lets go ahead and give them the 364 number and assume every rifle murder was from the barrel of a AR-15. Ask your gun grabbing "friends", lets say we get rid of every gun you call a "assault weapon" from the whole U.S., ok you've prevented 364 deaths, but what are you going to do about the other 13,558? 

When confronted about a new "assault weapon ban", I have never got a answer to the question and that will shut them up, because they don't have an answer. 

This also goes to show you that banning what they call "assault weapons" will do nothing to stop murders. Even if you stopped every murder committed my all rifles, you would only decrease murders by less than 0.03%. The reality is though, the actual murders by "assault weapons" are much less than that 364 number, and most people that did commit murders by what they call "assault weapons" would just use something else. Then you add the fact that by banning them you'll never actually get rid of them, it's a non issue that will change nothing. 

I find zero fault with that reasoning, but I thought they were idiots before you started poking holes in their logic with facts and common sense. LOL

[m16ty]

1 minute ago, BigK said:

I find zero fault with that reasoning, but I thought they were idiots before you started poking holes in their logic with facts and common sense. LOL

Believe it or not, I've had some positive results from people we would consider "anti-gun" on Facebook with that argument in the last few days. People are just running on emotion (as almost all liberals do), but when you force them to look at the facts it can make them think a little. I think we have a real chance at least softening some of these ignorant sheep if presented with hard facts, and most of these numbers I posted can be found on liberal sites (giving them credibility in their eyes). 

The people that really concern me are the people that know the facts I presented above, but choose to hide them or twist them. They are the ones trying to completely disarm us by any means necessary. They know that banning "assault weapons" won't do anything to prevent killings, and know that gives them a open door to ban other firearms. Now what their final plan is when we are completely disarmed I don't know, but I know it will be very bad.    

[BigK]

1 hour ago, m16ty said:

Believe it or not, I've had some positive results from people we would consider "anti-gun" on Facebook with that argument in the last few days. People are just running on emotion (as almost all liberals do), but when you force them to look at the facts it can make them think a little. I think we have a real chance at least softening some of these ignorant sheep if presented with hard facts, and most of these numbers I posted can be found on liberal sites (giving them credibility in their eyes). 

The people that really concern me are the people that know the facts I presented above, but choose to hide them or twist them. They are the ones trying to completely disarm us by any means necessary. They know that banning "assault weapons" won't do anything to prevent killings, and know that gives them a open door to ban other firearms. Now what their final plan is when we are completely disarmed I don't know, but I know it will be very bad.    

Facts, not feelings!!! Right?

This scumbags that know the real numbers, but push for disarming us are using the blissfully ignorant masses to do their bidding. Many who just think guns should be banned because it makes them feel safer and don't know the facts are puppets for them.