Build it and they won't come

Frank Krygowski writes:

On 10/19/2017 12:45 PM, wrote:
On Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 8:50:27 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 10/18/2017 9:28 PM, AMuzi wrote:

Licensed machine guns or light automatics used in any
criminal manner at all are virtually unknown. I linked earlier to the
numbers, something over 5,000 in Ohio alone.

How about that? Gun control works!


Apparently you refuse to understand that one nut does not a federal
law require.

You've forgotten that America has had many, many mass shootings in
recent decades. You've forgotten that many more than one gun nut has
been involved.

You use a stupid "study" of "mass shootings" that are almost
entirely gang warfare using guns that are already illegal to "prove"
that we have to jump to your delinquent tune.

Feel free to exempt gang warfare if you like, even though that's
rather odd. (Do you think it should be allowed??) You're still left
things like mass shootings of students in schools, people attending
church, people at office parties, people in night clubs, people
attending concerts. I suppose you must not remember those?

Why don't you apply the hammer you're always harping on with bicycle
related deaths, and compare actual death tolls? Like your odds, as a
USAian, of being shot by police vs being shot by a total stranger in a
mass shooting. I think you'll find that, while shootings are a problem
in our country, the "newsworthy" incidents that have you so hyped up
are, in fact, a "negligible" problem.

The real gun problems a suicide, suicide, being killed by a "loved
one", and, for young men, being killed while involved in criminal
activity.

On 10/19/2017 2:24 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 10/19/2017 12:36 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 10/19/2017 1:56 AM, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 18 Oct 2017 23:48:05 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote:

OK, I answered your question. You should now answer mine.
How many
rounds does a private citizen's gun really need to fire
in a minute? And
why?

I really enjoy the sarcasm. But I would comment that RPM,
rather than
being some archaic number used in ancient times is the
current
standard method of measuring the speed at which a firearm
fires.

You're refusing to answer.

I'm not asking about any "current standard method of
measuring speed," because that's not what I'm interested in.
Instead I'm asking how many rounds does a private citizen's
gun really need to fire in one minute.

Since you pretend to have trouble understanding that, let me
illustrate: I start a stop watch. You start to shoot. In one
minute, I say "STOP!" How many shots, during that minute,
are the minimum necessary for practical purposes? And
exactly why do you choose that number?

But again, I find your question to be ambiguous at best.

That's not a problem with the question. The real problem is
you absolutely don't want to answer.

Here's why I suspect you don't want to answer: It's because
no hunter has a need to fire more than 10 rounds in one
minute.Â* And if some evil person is invading your home, 10
shots within one minute should certainly convince him to go
elsewhere. If a person is target shooting, 10 shots in a
minute is fast enough.

Yes, I know there are machine gun shoots, fast draw
competitions and other weird hobbies. I have friends who
attend those. But those are hardly necessary activities.
They are play events for gun fetishists.

Until you come up with real answers and real reasons, I'll
assume you're simply refusing to admit your position is
logically indefensible.


I don't see why any of this matters...

It matters because in situations like a nut job firing into a concert
crowd, or shooting up a high school cafeteria, or killing people inside
a church, or blasting up a night club, etc... in situations like that,
guns that fire over 10 rounds within one minute do FAR more damage. It
is FAR harder for security guards or police or near-mythical "good guys
with guns" to stop the carnage.

The only practical purpose of such guns is to do lots of killing in a
target rich environment. I see no reason private citizens need that
level of lethality.

All other advanced countries control such guns far more rigidly than the
U.S. Not only have their civilizations not collapsed; as a result of
their laws, they have far fewer violence problems than the U.S.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 10/19/2017 4:26 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
Frank Krygowski writes:

On 10/19/2017 12:45 PM, wrote:
On Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 8:50:27 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 10/18/2017 9:28 PM, AMuzi wrote:

Licensed machine guns or light automatics used in any
criminal manner at all are virtually unknown. I linked earlier to the
numbers, something over 5,000 in Ohio alone.

How about that? Gun control works!


Apparently you refuse to understand that one nut does not a federal
law require.

You've forgotten that America has had many, many mass shootings in
recent decades. You've forgotten that many more than one gun nut has
been involved.

You use a stupid "study" of "mass shootings" that are almost
entirely gang warfare using guns that are already illegal to "prove"
that we have to jump to your delinquent tune.

Feel free to exempt gang warfare if you like, even though that's
rather odd. (Do you think it should be allowed??) You're still left
things like mass shootings of students in schools, people attending
church, people at office parties, people in night clubs, people
attending concerts. I suppose you must not remember those?

Why don't you apply the hammer you're always harping on with bicycle
related deaths, and compare actual death tolls? Like your odds, as a
USAian, of being shot by police vs being shot by a total stranger in a
mass shooting.

OK, looks like data is soft; but what I'm finding indicates there might
be, very roughly, 1,000 police killings per year.
http://www.newsweek.com/how-many-ame...ch-year-480712

Most of those are almost certainly people who are confronted by cops as
a result of some (alleged?) illegal activity on their part. Sorry, but
that's not going to be me.

But even so, there are at least 30 times as many non-police gun deaths
in the U.S.

This site https://twitter.com/GunDeaths lists 284 mass shootings so far
in 2017. Since they're usually defined as four or more casualties, it's
almost certain the total count of casualties is over 1000. Those are
not deaths, of course; but unlike police actions, those are usually
people not involved in law breaking at the time.

I think you'll find that, while shootings are a problem
in our country, the "newsworthy" incidents that have you so hyped up
are, in fact, a "negligible" problem.

I think all the gun deaths are a problem. Yes, even those where cops
pulled the trigger. And I'll note that in countries not awash in guns,
cops rarely have to kill anyone.

The real gun problems a suicide, suicide, being killed by a "loved
one", and, for young men, being killed while involved in criminal
activity.

Yes, those are problems too (although I would have listed suicide only
once). The last one overlaps with the cop problem you brought up. I'll
note again that all tend to be smaller problems in countries with
rational gun control.



--
- Frank Krygowski

On Thu, 19 Oct 2017 13:36:53 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 10/19/2017 1:56 AM, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 18 Oct 2017 23:48:05 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote:

OK, I answered your question. You should now answer mine. How many
rounds does a private citizen's gun really need to fire in a minute? And
why?

I really enjoy the sarcasm. But I would comment that RPM, rather than
being some archaic number used in ancient times is the current
standard method of measuring the speed at which a firearm fires.

You're refusing to answer.

I'm not asking about any "current standard method of measuring speed,"
because that's not what I'm interested in. Instead I'm asking how many
rounds does a private citizen's gun really need to fire in one minute.

Since you pretend to have trouble understanding that, let me illustrate:
I start a stop watch. You start to shoot. In one minute, I say "STOP!"
How many shots, during that minute, are the minimum necessary for
practical purposes? And exactly why do you choose that number?

But again, I find your question to be ambiguous at best.

That's not a problem with the question. The real problem is you
absolutely don't want to answer.


No, you are being ambiguous. Your first cry was, if I remember
correctly, was them guns fire too fast and you suggested some sort of
button that had to be pushed before pulling the trigger. Now you are
into "the minimum necessary for practical purposes?"

Here's why I suspect you don't want to answer: It's because no hunter
has a need to fire more than 10 rounds in one minute. And if some evil
person is invading your home, 10 shots within one minute should
certainly convince him to go elsewhere. If a person is target shooting,
10 shots in a minute is fast enough.

Hunter? How did hunters get into the discussion? Do you feel that the
only valid use of a firearm is the shoot a deer?

As for not answering, I did answer, I referenced target shooting as
that is definitive data. X rounds in Y time. And I furnished the data
for pistols, rifles and shotguns. And I explained why I used that data
as opposed to your hunting criteria which varies from none to five
shots as fast as I could.

You state above, "If a person is target shooting, 10 shots in a minute
is fast enough." and this is after I carefully explained the
requirement of all three of the common shooting sports.
You say, 10 shots in a minute, i.e., 1 shot every 6 seconds when the
reality is 5 shots in 10 seconds or three times the speed that you
feel is the maximum required.

Whether you cannot accept target shooting as a normal activity or you
cannot calculate firearm requirements from the data I furnished I have
no idea. But asking ambitious questions after the information has been
furnish is rather revealing. Isn't it.

As for the ambiguity of your question let me ask one,"I'm asking how
many bicycles does a private citizen's need"?

So tell us, how many? And, provide some accurate data to back up your
assertion.


Yes, I know there are machine gun shoots, fast draw competitions and
other weird hobbies. I have friends who attend those. But those are
hardly necessary activities. They are play events for gun fetishists.

Yup, Weird play for gun fetishist.... I assume you are referring to
the current 17 shooting events on the Olympic Games schedule.

Until you come up with real answers and real reasons, I'll assume you're
simply refusing to admit your position is logically indefensible.

As I said, the sarcasm is interesting. Sort of a fall back when you
can't accept reality.

--
Cheers,

John B.

On Thu, 19 Oct 2017 09:45:02 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 8:50:27 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 10/18/2017 9:28 PM, AMuzi wrote:


But the limitations and impediments of an FFL are not merely monetary-
it's a long, tedious process and involves all your personal history into
a Form 4 plus an ATF character evaluation/ background check. Even with
your FFL, every purchase is recorded, no other person can so much as
touch your firearm and it must be secured at all times at the listed
address. The FFL holder is subject to anytime ATF inspection which they
really do, randomly, at odd hours.

Then again, as North Dakotans say of their weather, "keeps out the
riffraff".* Licensed machine guns or light automatics used in any
criminal manner at all are virtually unknown. I linked earlier to the
numbers, something over 5,000 in Ohio alone.

How about that? Gun control works!

Frank, Eric Hoffer wrote that people of all ages can act juvenile and a large part of the problems in this country is the delinquent attitudes of people.

Apparently you refuse to understand that one nut does not a federal law require. You use a stupid "study" of "mass shootings" that are almost entirely gang warfare using guns that are already illegal to "prove" that we have to jump to your delinquent tune.

You underplay the fact that countries with the strictest possible gun laws have equally bad mass shootings or that mass killings have been performed with many things other than guns. Apparently the Boston Marathon has already been lost in the fog of time.

You couldn't care less that a large motivation for the 2nd Amendment was to protect the people of this country from the government itself. Or that the largest examples of mass murder in history have been governments of their own people.

You are a perfect example of Eric Hoffer's warnings - a juvenile delinquent that wants a nanny and not a government.

I read something the other day that seems to be applicable in these
type of discussions:

"We are advised to NOT judge ALL Muslims by the actions of a few
lunatics, but we are encouraged to judge ALL gun owners by the actions
of a few lunatics." Funny how that works.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Thu, 19 Oct 2017 14:00:00 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 10/19/2017 12:45 PM, wrote:
On Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 8:50:27 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 10/18/2017 9:28 PM, AMuzi wrote:

Licensed machine guns or light automatics used in any
criminal manner at all are virtually unknown. I linked earlier to the
numbers, something over 5,000 in Ohio alone.

How about that? Gun control works!


Apparently you refuse to understand that one nut does not a federal law require.

You've forgotten that America has had many, many mass shootings in
recent decades. You've forgotten that many more than one gun nut has
been involved.

http://www.shootingtracker.com/Main_Page
During the period 2013 - 2015 there were 89 people killed in "Mass
Shootings" in the U.S..
During the same period there were 2,296 bicyclists kill in the U.S.

Yes Sir! Gun control is absolutely necessary!
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Thu, 19 Oct 2017 16:26:44 -0400, Radey Shouman
wrote:

Frank Krygowski writes:

On 10/19/2017 12:45 PM, wrote:
On Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 8:50:27 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 10/18/2017 9:28 PM, AMuzi wrote:

Licensed machine guns or light automatics used in any
criminal manner at all are virtually unknown. I linked earlier to the
numbers, something over 5,000 in Ohio alone.

How about that? Gun control works!


Apparently you refuse to understand that one nut does not a federal
law require.

You've forgotten that America has had many, many mass shootings in
recent decades. You've forgotten that many more than one gun nut has
been involved.

You use a stupid "study" of "mass shootings" that are almost
entirely gang warfare using guns that are already illegal to "prove"
that we have to jump to your delinquent tune.

Feel free to exempt gang warfare if you like, even though that's
rather odd. (Do you think it should be allowed??) You're still left
things like mass shootings of students in schools, people attending
church, people at office parties, people in night clubs, people
attending concerts. I suppose you must not remember those?

Why don't you apply the hammer you're always harping on with bicycle
related deaths, and compare actual death tolls? Like your odds, as a
USAian, of being shot by police vs being shot by a total stranger in a
mass shooting. I think you'll find that, while shootings are a problem
in our country, the "newsworthy" incidents that have you so hyped up
are, in fact, a "negligible" problem.

The real gun problems a suicide, suicide, being killed by a "loved
one", and, for young men, being killed while involved in criminal
activity.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/mortality/lcwk9.htm
Contains 113 causes of death in the U.S.

Accidental firearm discharge is #100, Assault with a firearm is #107
and Firearm discharge cause unknown is #110.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Thu, 19 Oct 2017 17:13:35 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 10/19/2017 4:26 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
Frank Krygowski writes:

On 10/19/2017 12:45 PM, wrote:
On Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 8:50:27 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 10/18/2017 9:28 PM, AMuzi wrote:

Licensed machine guns or light automatics used in any
criminal manner at all are virtually unknown. I linked earlier to the
numbers, something over 5,000 in Ohio alone.

How about that? Gun control works!


Apparently you refuse to understand that one nut does not a federal
law require.

You've forgotten that America has had many, many mass shootings in
recent decades. You've forgotten that many more than one gun nut has
been involved.

You use a stupid "study" of "mass shootings" that are almost
entirely gang warfare using guns that are already illegal to "prove"
that we have to jump to your delinquent tune.

Feel free to exempt gang warfare if you like, even though that's
rather odd. (Do you think it should be allowed??) You're still left
things like mass shootings of students in schools, people attending
church, people at office parties, people in night clubs, people
attending concerts. I suppose you must not remember those?

Why don't you apply the hammer you're always harping on with bicycle
related deaths, and compare actual death tolls? Like your odds, as a
USAian, of being shot by police vs being shot by a total stranger in a
mass shooting.

OK, looks like data is soft; but what I'm finding indicates there might
be, very roughly, 1,000 police killings per year.
http://www.newsweek.com/how-many-ame...ch-year-480712

Most of those are almost certainly people who are confronted by cops as
a result of some (alleged?) illegal activity on their part. Sorry, but
that's not going to be me.

But even so, there are at least 30 times as many non-police gun deaths
in the U.S.

This site https://twitter.com/GunDeaths lists 284 mass shootings so far
in 2017. Since they're usually defined as four or more casualties, it's
almost certain the total count of casualties is over 1000. Those are
not deaths, of course; but unlike police actions, those are usually
people not involved in law breaking at the time.

Are you sure that data is accurate? The Wikki has it that in 2017
there were 13 mass shootings to date in 2017? Deaths were 100,
including the perpetrator if dead.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catego..._United_States


--
Cheers,

John B.

On Thursday, October 19, 2017 at 11:00:07 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 10/19/2017 12:45 PM, wrote:
On Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 8:50:27 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 10/18/2017 9:28 PM, AMuzi wrote:

Licensed machine guns or light automatics used in any
criminal manner at all are virtually unknown. I linked earlier to the
numbers, something over 5,000 in Ohio alone.

How about that? Gun control works!


Apparently you refuse to understand that one nut does not a federal law require.

You've forgotten that America has had many, many mass shootings in
recent decades. You've forgotten that many more than one gun nut has
been involved.

You use a stupid "study" of "mass shootings" that are almost entirely gang warfare using guns that are already illegal to "prove" that we have to jump to your delinquent tune.

Feel free to exempt gang warfare if you like, even though that's rather
odd. (Do you think it should be allowed??) You're still left things like
mass shootings of students in schools, people attending church, people
at office parties, people in night clubs, people attending concerts. I
suppose you must not remember those?...

What I think is odd that you believe that drug gangs shooting each other with illegal weapons often gained from the police themselves which are illegal for convicted felons to own should be counted as some sort of crime that could be preventable.

In case you were ever aware of it - criminals are called criminals because they commit crimes.

It would NEVER occur to you that putting these criminals in jail for a period of time commensurate with their crimes might reduce them more effectively than ineffective and unconstitutional gun laws would.

Do you know that in California gun battles on the freeways that involved innocent people driving along are likely to end in NO PROSECUTION if no injuries occur and the damage is paid for? With injuries, minimal time in jail if the injuries are not fatal? They have shot at each other in front of the Oakland main police station.

On 10/20/2017 2:15 AM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 19 Oct 2017 13:36:53 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 10/19/2017 1:56 AM, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 18 Oct 2017 23:48:05 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote:

OK, I answered your question. You should now answer mine. How many
rounds does a private citizen's gun really need to fire in a minute? And
why?

I really enjoy the sarcasm. But I would comment that RPM, rather than
being some archaic number used in ancient times is the current
standard method of measuring the speed at which a firearm fires.

You're refusing to answer.

I'm not asking about any "current standard method of measuring speed,"
because that's not what I'm interested in. Instead I'm asking how many
rounds does a private citizen's gun really need to fire in one minute.

Since you pretend to have trouble understanding that, let me illustrate:
I start a stop watch. You start to shoot. In one minute, I say "STOP!"
How many shots, during that minute, are the minimum necessary for
practical purposes? And exactly why do you choose that number?

But again, I find your question to be ambiguous at best.

That's not a problem with the question. The real problem is you
absolutely don't want to answer.


No, you are being ambiguous. Your first cry was, if I remember
correctly, was them guns fire too fast and you suggested some sort of
button that had to be pushed before pulling the trigger. Now you are
into "the minimum necessary for practical purposes?"

Your memory is faulty. But in any case, why not answer the question I'm
asking now? I've rephrased it several times hoping that you would A)
understand, then B) really answer.

How many rounds does a private citizen's gun really need to fire in one
minute? And why do you pick that number?


Here's why I suspect you don't want to answer: It's because no hunter
has a need to fire more than 10 rounds in one minute. And if some evil
person is invading your home, 10 shots within one minute should
certainly convince him to go elsewhere. If a person is target shooting,
10 shots in a minute is fast enough.

Hunter? How did hunters get into the discussion?

HA HA HA HA! We're talking about practical uses for guns, and you're
surprised hunters come up? John, that's amazing. :-)

Do you feel that the
only valid use of a firearm is the shoot a deer?

No, I never hinted at that. Now answer the questions!

As for not answering, I did answer, I referenced target shooting as
that is definitive data. X rounds in Y time. And I furnished the data
for pistols, rifles and shotguns. And I explained why I used that data
as opposed to your hunting criteria which varies from none to five
shots as fast as I could.

You state above, "If a person is target shooting, 10 shots in a minute
is fast enough." and this is after I carefully explained the
requirement of all three of the common shooting sports.
You say, 10 shots in a minute, i.e., 1 shot every 6 seconds when the
reality is 5 shots in 10 seconds or three times the speed that you
feel is the maximum required.

Sigh. I asked about shots in one minute. You mentioned five shots in ten
seconds for target competition. I said "And how long before the sixth
shot?" I suspect it's longer than a minute. That means a gun that can
fire no more than five shots in a minute meets your standard. I don't
see how that can be difficult to understand.

But to discuss your example more fully: If the game (because that's what
it is) requires a higher number of shots within one minute than is
beneficial for society as a whole, then change the damned rules of the
game! Shooting game rules are not sacred!

I _do_ know guys who enjoy machine gun shoots. They probably have rules
for their games, too, but that doesn't mean that every dork with a
tough-guy fantasy should be allowed to buy a machine gun.

Whether you cannot accept target shooting as a normal activity or you
cannot calculate firearm requirements from the data I furnished I have
no idea. But asking ambitious questions after the information has been
furnish is rather revealing. Isn't it.

When you tell me how long it takes for you to make that sixth shot, I'll
be able to say more.

Your inability (or really, refusal) to give a simple number is much more
revealing. Again: How many rounds does a private citizen really need to
shoot within one minute?

And then: Why?

All that's required is one number and a simple explanation, not some
diversion into shooting games. Nobody _really_ needs to play at shooting
games.

Yes, I know there are machine gun shoots, fast draw competitions and
other weird hobbies. I have friends who attend those. But those are
hardly necessary activities. They are play events for gun fetishists.

Yup, Weird play for gun fetishist.... I assume you are referring to
the current 17 shooting events on the Olympic Games schedule.

And just LOOK at how fast these guys shoot in the Olympics! :-)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5yiOlJdrG0

--
- Frank Krygowski