Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Lack Of Knowledge Of Guns Is The Problem

August 19, 2013

To The Reader’s Forum: I would like to write this in response to the person who wrote the Open Letter to Senator Young. American citizens’ Second Amendment is not the problem....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(54)

panthers1

Aug-25-13 8:28 PM

Thanks for your opinion Tyler. I am proud of you and Cathy Young for "sticking to your guns!"

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

50s4ever

Aug-22-13 8:20 PM

Air guns had little use and success for a reason. No, it wasn't the military/industrial complex complicit with the chemical producers driving the market....maybe in one of your parallel universes.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ironyoozesfromyouryap

Aug-22-13 12:30 PM

We're on a gun thread and he's talking about food stamps. Wonders why no one will respond to him.

0 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ironyoozesfromyouryap

Aug-21-13 11:17 PM

The US colonies in 1800 were not "the world." Oy. If less than 1500 guns were produced and they were a European invention, it is likely that very few Americans heard of them - let alone slim to none chance any touched or used one.

Needless to say, digression is important at this point. The Girandoni was a minor, yet somewhat innovative blip. It did not create in the Founding Fathers some whir of excitement and it has nothing to do with the 2nd Amendment of the US. To make the argument is laughable, then again...most of the people pushing it right now are always laughable.

LOL.

0 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ironyoozesfromyouryap

Aug-21-13 11:15 PM

"You have exposed your lack of understanding on firearms and history. "

LOL, guess we'll go for another round...

"All of the firearms of that era were hard to use."

Ok? If you're trying to make an argument of relativity, that fails. It was harder to use. And no, many weapons today do not take much skill to use.

"They didn't have mass production in that era.."

1500 over FORTY years. Oy.

"At that time in history those 1500 rifles had the firepower of 30,000 rifles of the era."

What part of "they took a ton of work to use" did you miss? You have grossly overestimated the weapon.

"No one knows when they first arrived in America."

Seemingly the first documented case was 1804. Clearly, the weapon was not as amazing and popular as you think. It was not a new concept.

"To think such a weapon could have been in use 11 years without the world knowing about it..."

The US colonies in 1800 were not "the worl

0 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ironyoozesfromyouryap

Aug-21-13 11:07 PM

"Isn't it amazing how Ironyclapping "pops" in, lays an egg then disappears when confronted with the truth."

LOL, more Seadog humor! He tries to take the conversation on some far off tangent and whines when someone isn't on here 24/7 like him to walk the yellow brick road.

You get ignored for a reason. Maybe if we all did ignore you, you'd go away.

0 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

sonoma

Aug-21-13 5:40 PM

Irony--- You have exposed your lack of understanding on firearms and history.

1. All of the firearms of that era were hard to use.

2. All of the firearms of that era, and even today take a great deal of skill/practice to be proficient in their use.

3. they didn't have mass production in that era---1500 of a single type of weapon is a fair amount and a lot of work to produce. Also the population of the world was a bit smaller than today.

4. At that time in history those 1500 rifles had the firepower of 30,000 rifles of the era.

5. No one knows when they first arrived in America. The trip with Lewis and Clark made it famous here because it is believed it was what kept the Indians from overwhelming the explorers.

To think such a weapon could have been in use 11 years without the world knowing about it is "WELLL" you know. LOL

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Hammond

Aug-21-13 1:05 PM

The problem Tyler, is that you are doing something that gun-control advocates are unable to do: You've formed an opinion on something using your mind, facts, and logic, rather than emotion. It's touch to fight emotion, but keep it up.

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ironyoozesfromyouryap

Aug-21-13 9:23 AM

KCK: leave the analogies for Fedup.

*******ww w.de fensemedianetwork****/stories/the-girandoni- air-rifle/

Fragile, hard to use, took extraordinary skill to use, less than 1500 built, very few used in Austrian war, first documentation in the Americas was 1804.

0 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ironyoozesfromyouryap

Aug-21-13 9:17 AM

"Gee, you mean like supporting illegal aliens, putting millions on food stamps, pandering to the Blacks and lying to them for their votes?"

LOL. I got a good laugh. Thanks again, Seadog. Lying to blacks for votes? That's the GOP heir-archal specialty. Millions on food stamps? Guess you think food stamps started in 2009, eh? Guess you haven't heard the repeat drum of moderate GOP'ers on how to court the hispanic population.

0 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

KCW007

Aug-20-13 8:45 PM

Let's see. The Girandoni repeater rifle was developed in 1779 and placed into service with the Austrian army in 1780. Then, some eleven years (11) later, the U.S. Bill of Rights, including the Second Amendment, was ratified in Dec. 1791. There is absolutely no doubt that samples of the Girandondi had made its way across the Atlantic by the time the Bill of Rights was ratified. The company which made them would have sent it's sales people all over the globe by that time. A number of the nation's founders were keenly aware of, and interested in advancements in military hardware, so there is no doubt that at least some of them were familiar with the Girandondi technology. Being prominent government officials in their own states, some of them might have even been given the opportunity to fire it during company sales pitches, as was a common practice.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ironyoozesfromyouryap

Aug-20-13 7:15 PM

1780*

Also, it was a fragile weapon.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ironyoozesfromyouryap

Aug-20-13 7:14 PM

Girandoni*

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ironyoozesfromyouryap

Aug-20-13 7:12 PM

"There was a semi-automatic rifle with a 20 round magazine capable of killing a man at over 150 yards in use 11 years BEFORE the 2nd amendment was ratified. The framers were well aware of advancements in weapons."

Nice try, sloppy. The Giradoni wasn't created until 1790. When was the 2nd Amendment ratified again?

Also, the Giradoni was European. It didn't cross the boat until later. Additionally, it took highly trained soldiers to employ and the work it took to shoot was beyond that which made it a very efficient weapon.

It was a minor event in history and the Founding Fathers were not "well-aware of it".

Nice try.

0 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ironyoozesfromyouryap

Aug-20-13 7:07 PM

"I don't know that I've ever heard anyone call for the abolition of all gun laws."

I have. I'd open your ears if I were you - Youtube is a good resource for finding out what is really being said.

The problem with the GOP and Conservatives is they support whatever selfishly helps them. One day they'll be for gun control; the next they'll be against it. So wishy-washy, hard to keep track of what Neo-Cons really want. Just saw a documentary on 3D printed guns. Kind of a big deal. The reason they are being created is to skirt gun laws.

0 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

KCW007

Aug-20-13 10:49 AM

The Girandoni wasn't a semiauto but rather a fast loading, tube feed repeater. As a military weapon it was supplied with replacement "speed loader" type tubes and replacement air bottles. A trained user could get off an aimed shot every couple of seconds. It was effective for military purposes out to 150 yards. As a military weapon it served for about 35 years beginning in the late 1700's. They were available in various calibers for the civilian market. Its innovative design concept of tube feed and "speed loader" tubes would be incorporated into later arms such as the Henry repeater.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

sonoma

Aug-20-13 7:49 AM

^ Girandoni air rifle as used by Lewis and Clark. A National Firearms Museum Treasure Gun.

I read the book Undaunted Courage about the expedition but the NRA has this U tube video that shows the gun and talks about it's place in the history of our country. Note it shoots 22 rounds in 30 seconds not 20 as I originally stated.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

nonfiction

Aug-20-13 6:22 AM

sonoma

Interesting, Where can I read about this. Not calling you a liar, but I would like to read about this.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

nonfiction

Aug-20-13 6:19 AM

Seadog,

I think harsher gun laws would help some, by locking up criminals for a long time. But I don't think it would stop criminals from committing crimes with guns. Or crazy people from shooting up movie theatres and schools. These people don't think with the same mind set normal people do. But I would rather have violent criminals in jail than non-violent drug users.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

KCW007

Aug-19-13 9:32 PM

I don't know that I've ever heard anyone call for the abolition of all gun laws. On the other hand I've heard a great many call for the full enforcement of those gun laws already on the books. There certainly are enough of those to go around!

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

sonoma

Aug-19-13 6:21 PM

There was a semi-automatic rifle with a 20 round magazine capable of killing a man at over 150 yards in use 11 years BEFORE the 2nd amendment was ratified. The framers were well aware of advancements in weapons. Heck, Lewis and Clark carried a semi-auto rifle on their expedition.

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

50s4ever

Aug-19-13 6:20 PM

Something fishy about people being against stop and frisk, and against self defense, as well as against cops with cameras.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

sonoma

Aug-19-13 6:14 PM

CCountrylifer-- WRONG--Each election cycle the NRA puts out a list of ALL politicians running for public office and rates them according to their prior votes or answers to a questionnaire that was sent to each one of them. Repubs tend to rank higher about 80-85% of the time but Dems were given the nod in about 50 races last cycle. Remember Manchin of West VA? That probably won't happen next time. Word on the street is he was offered a high level job in exchange for his change of heart. Time will tell

The reason Obama didn't get their endorsement was his history prior to being elected and the inside knowledge of his plans if reelected. The Feinstein bill we were told was drafted in answer to Newton had been worked on for over a year BEFORE and was just waiting for the election and the right moment. It's all politics.

7 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ironyoozesfromyouryap

Aug-19-13 6:05 PM

"First of all who is calling for gun laws to be abolished?"

The NRA, most Republicans, most Conservatives, all Libertarians according to their ideology, most gun owners, the letter writer...

"Secondly, I was responding to your alter ego Nonfiction."

So if it is my "alter-ego", that would imply you were responding to me, yes?

LOL, Seadog, at it again!

0 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

jamestownbob

Aug-19-13 4:36 PM

Three quick points: a. the safe act has in know way reduced gun related crime. b. the second amendment has absolutely nothing to do with hunting. c. claiming that the founding fathers had know idea of future technological advancements in firearms is completely ludicrous.

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 54 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web