"Mindy, I was speaking with a coworker of mine about 30 mins ago who lives in Rockford. She said no rain there last night but a couple of flights to O'Hare were diverted to the Rockford airport. It was fairly nasty here. "
 |
The World's Largest Coalition of Nontheists and Nontheist Communities!
Atheist Reasoning on Gun Control in the U.S
Atheists are a small minority in the U.S. Advocates of gun control might be a minority in America as well. In light of the recent shootings in Aurora I am curious as to how atheists in this network view the lack of gun restrictions. There are probably divergent views.
I have trouble believing that both presidential candidates are steering away from any call for reform after the horrific mass shooting. In my opinion it is insane to allow citizens access to assault weapons that can kill scores of people in a few minutes. It was even more shocking to hear on a news show that a family had to raise money to pay for the immense hospital bills for one of the victims while they were already crippled with medical bills from the mothers fight with breast cancer.
As a Canadian I came to stand with my U.S brothers for the reason rally and freedom from religion. I would be willing to come down to the capitol and march for two other important causes. Gun control and universal health care.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Steph S. on -
I don't understand assault weapons myself - why would someone need a gun like that?
I am still researching these issues and trying to decide on them.
-
Permalink Reply by Nerdlass on -
It's for all those mutant deer that shoot laser beams out from their antlers. Obviously. x.x
-
Permalink Reply by Sentient Biped on -
This is correct. You forgot to add that the mutant lazerbeam deer are gay illegal immigrant muslim atheists to boot.
-
Permalink Reply by A. Noni Moose on -
The argument is not who "needs" that gun. It is who "wants" that gun. I have friends with AR-15 rifles. They are not full auto weapons. You cannot just buy a full auto weapon as a normal citizen. So, what a gun looks like is not a crime. That is the problem with gun control activits, they know nothing about guns. An AR-15 is a .223 caliber semi-auto rifle. My deer gun is a .308 caliber rifle. Any one with math skills knows that .308 is a larger number than .223 . In other words, my deer rifle does more damage than an AR-15. Also, semi-auto is semi-auto. 1 bullet is released with each trigger pull. An "assault weapon" fires no quicker than any other semi-auto rifle that you can pick up from Wal-Mart. People don't want us buying them because they look like military weapons. That is all.
All that being said, here is the issue to me: it is not about what I "need", it is about my right to have anything I want as long as it does not hurt others. I have been around guns all my life and have never shot anyone, robbed anyone, etc. And, what about this: I have never killed a deer with my rifles. I use them all for target shooting only. That is what I enjoy doing with them and that is my business, not some scared ill-informed activist.
It seems that we, as atheists, should always want to be on the side of freedom. My gun is my business. NOW< if I rob or shoot someone then I should be prosecuted. That is where this country drops the ball. We don't make it a deterrent to commit crimes..we only use the crimes to make our own politcal statement.
-
Permalink Reply by Mathew T. on -
Not to sound like a smartass now, but why then couldn't you lay claim to owning a nuclear reactor, so long as you promised never to harm anyone with it? After all, there is very little (if any) evidence supporting the claim that personally operated nuclear reactors have ever hurt anyone. If your logic is that something should only be taken away the moment it does harm, why are we stopping people from owning anything at all? Rocket launchers, crystal meth, lion cubs, and nuclear reactors included?
I'm with you on the AR-15 - it's a hot topic and most people don't understand how a pistol is far more dangerous when in the hands of a would-be gunman, simply by virtue of he/she being able to hide it - but I can't get behind the idea that my neighbour should be able to own a jeep-mounted mini gun and 100,000 rounds just because he's a free "soul", and he's never committed a crime.
-
Permalink Reply by Richard K. Emms on -
Steph,
I agree with you. Please see my reply below.
The Colonial Gunsmith
-
Permalink Reply by Dr. Allan H. Clark on -
I agree, but it seems we are definitely in the minority on this one. Americans love guns and will not stand for any restrictions on their possession.
-
Permalink Reply by Joseph Heston on
-
You're right about Americans not standing for restrictions on their possessions even though the 2nd Amendment gives the states the right to regulate weapons.
-
Permalink Reply by Tom Sarbeck on
-
Joseph, until you add some specifics, your conclusion differs from that of another Heston: Charleton, a recent NRA officer. It also differs from current law.
You'll find specifics if you do a google search on "scotus heller" (you'll find the US Supreme Court ruling).
-
Permalink Reply by Tammy S on -
I think I was shocked that the ban on high capacity magazines had been lifted while I was sleeping a few years ago! I was floored that someone 'off the street' could just purchase a drum capable of holding 100+ rounds without a federal firearms license. I remember people being up in arms just after the ban when they couldn't buy a 31 round banana magazine and I remember thinking, if you don't hit the target the first or second shot, you probably shouldn't be shooting to begin with. So where's the necessity for carrying that high capacity of a mag unless you're a soldier involved in a protracted gunfight? It just makes no sense at all. I've also heard the argument, but you can hunt with it! But why would you when there are better hunting rifles, far more reliable 'for use' in hunting on the market? Are we going to be ventilating the deer to reduce drag on the corpse, or did we want to eat it after? Frankly you should be taking the animal down as cleanly, quickly and humanely as possible with 'one' well placed shot, not terrorizing and torturing the poor thing to death, besides the method of death does effect the texture of the meat! First nations people bow hunted... but I digress...
All that having been said however gun control won't stop the flow of illegal weapons into and out of our country because we've been at this ownership thing for far too long now creating a healthy black market that would only grow by leaps and bounds if we legislated a ban. I own guns myself and I see nothing wrong with 'responsible' gun ownership, if you have nothing to hide you won't mind a little regulation. So we need to consider other methods like:
Better ownership record keeping with some possible penalties for failure to register private purchases
Flagging the 'amount' of ammunition and weapons purchased in a specified time frame,
Setting purchase limits on ammunition for bureau notification like we do certain fertilizers and ag chemicals since the bombing of the Oklahoma City Federal Building.
Frankly someone as hell bent on destruction as he was, will find a way even if guns aren't available to them. He seemed to be a rather proficient bomb maker as well, I shudder to think it, but it's probably a good thing he had a penchant for guns or we'd have likely seen a great many more fatalities than we did.
-
Permalink Reply by Sentient Biped on
-
For a minute I thought a round banana magazine was a periodical about unusual shaped tropical fruits.
IN Oregon hunters and hikers occasionally disappear during hunting season. I assume they were mistaken for deer. I once discussed with a hunter that I wore fay-glo orange while hiking and he told me "for god's sake, do do that! Hunters will use you to set their scopes" whatever that means. Didn't sound good tho.
CONNECT WITH ATHEIST NEXUS
Latest Activity
- Top News
- Everything
The Flying Atheist replied to Loren Miller's discussion Latest Activity?"I agree with you MB. I liked the "sweeping overview" of topics on one screen, both forum activity and blogs, that the old homepage allowed. This was a great way to have different topics catch my eye all in one place and prompt…"
booklover replied to booklover's discussion Even More FB Finds..."LOL Carl!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :D
"
booklover commented on Ruth Anthony-Gardner's group Hang With Friends"Thanks for reporting that Ruth, I like it better this way! I can't believe a nurse used the word "telescope" in describing what the doctor was going to use to look at your bladder!!!!!!! Wow! Vocabulary review time! lol.
Steph,…"
Loren Miller replied to Ruth Anthony-Gardner's discussion Oklahoma Tornado in the group Hang With Friends"Welcome to the effects of 200+ mph winds!"
Mathew T. replied to Alexandra's discussion Need help with irreducible complexity"This is another way of eventually going back to stating that abiogenesis is impossible, as many theists do. There are bound to be those here who have studied far more in depth than I have, but my own findings have been that we have absolutely NO…"
The Flying Atheist replied to Ruth Anthony-Gardner's discussion Oklahoma Tornado in the group Hang With Friends"Yup, that's why tornado warnings are to be taken seriously. During severe storms with tornado potential I turn off my TV sound or Stereo in my apartment so I can hear what possibly may be coming my way. I want to be able to hear the…"
"i didn't see it till today, and it inspired me to start a discussion on it. but while i had a negative reaction to Wolf, i was much more interested in that brave woman. it can't be easy to come out as an atheist on national tv…"
© 2013 Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.
