TargetTalk

So far 'Hell NO!' is over 50% of the vote. How long before a decision is made and Rover's 'mini rant' thread goes missing?
http://www.targettalk.org/viewtopic.php?t=44200
While I appreciate the sentiments expressed in that Youtube video as being honestly expressed, I do not see the relevance of such inflammatory rhetoric in a target shooting forum. I'm sure there are a thousand or more sites along the lines of muhrights.com or 2Aordie.org. (Made those up, but wouldn't be surprised if they existed.) While the apparent fear of the US government slaughtering millions of its citizens may be genuine, is this really the place for propagating that fear?

I was going to shut up on this one, but what the hell. I go for #2 on this one; it IS a shooting forum.

It may be preaching to the choir, but there are many uninformed new shooters and some that just need to "snap outta the crap."

spektr wrote:My position is that since nobody I can think of here would actually support gun control per se, there is no need to allow it.

This has turned out not to be the case; for example, we have British, Australian and Canadian members who do vocally "support gun control per se." And that's why I voted for #2. Of course you can go to any number of sites to read anti-gun-control rants, each one trying to top the previous posting in macho, chest-thumping attitude, but where else can you find logical discussion? Yes, I'm not likely to change my anti-gun-control beliefs, but logical discussion helps me to clarify exactly what I believe, and why.

In any event, many thanks to Scott for asking this question, and for providing the whole site!

FredB

You could always open a separate "Politics" Forum.

I have yet to see any Australian and British posters here talk about their side of the stories about gun control. I always wonder about the British because those long arm free pistols are ridiculous. I also always wonder why don't the entire British team, or any up and comers or anyone interested in target pistol shooting, all move to Northern Ireland?

FredB wrote: I'm not likely to change my anti-gun-control beliefs

This is steadily drifting into debate, but, I suspect you and others do believe in 'gun control', you're just happy with the status quo - ie you can have a gun legally but criminals and infants for example can't.

There is some level of 'gun control' everywhere - unless you live in a utopia where the mentally deranged can buy 155mm howitzers over the counter no questions asked.

If people can't or won't accept that they already have 'gun control' imposed on them and they support it it its pointless to discuss beyond that point.

JamesH wrote:

FredB wrote: I'm not likely to change my anti-gun-control beliefs

This is steadily drifting into debate, but, I suspect you and others do believe in 'gun control', you're just happy with the status quo - ie you can have a gun legally but criminals and infants for example can't.

There is some level of 'gun control' everywhere - unless you live in a utopia where the mentally deranged can buy 155mm howitzers over the counter no questions asked.

If people can't or won't accept that they already have 'gun control' imposed on them and they support it it its pointless to discuss beyond that point.

You're twisting words. "Gun control" in normal usage refers to small arms, not howitzers. Age limits apply to many items in common use. As far as criminals and mentally disturbed people, in the U.S. - if not in your country - they can (and do) always obtain guns if they desire. The illegality of them doing so is irrelevant to them, but is the basis for thousands of laws that affect only the law-abiding. As a fundamental principle, the state should not determine the exercise of basic rights. That's where we differ.

FredB

P.S. To be perfectly clear, I am NOT happy with the status quo, and I believe most gun control laws in the U.S. - and especially those in my state - should be repealed.

This is simply a discussion on if political topics should be allowed and we've already strayed into the political discussions and flippant comments.

And as usual someone who doesn't even post under their own name tends to start the troublesome comments.

Why can't we make sure only registered users can post?

conradin wrote:Why can't we make sure only registered users can post?

believe me, some of the spammers and trolls register - keeps the moderators on their toes.

Wow! 57% say, "Hell, No".

But then this isn't a democracy.

Spencer wrote:

conradin wrote:Why can't we make sure only registered users can post?

believe me, some of the spammers and trolls register - keeps the moderators on their toes.

Just look at the "Memberlist" to see how many recent registrations are spammers. I'm guessing that it runs at 80-90%.

Spencer wrote:

conradin wrote:Why can't we make sure only registered users can post?

believe me, some of the spammers and trolls register - keeps the moderators on their toes.

Ok, probably not possible, but can we somehow automatically delete any post with the word kitchen in it (and remotely explode the computer it was sent from)?

j-team wrote:

Spencer wrote:

conradin wrote:Why can't we make sure only registered users can post?

believe me, some of the spammers and trolls register - keeps the moderators on their toes.

Ok, probably not possible, but can we somehow automatically delete any post with the word kitchen in it (and remotely explode the computer it was sent from)?

I wish

Spencer wrote:

j-team wrote:

Spencer wrote:

conradin wrote:Why can't we make sure only registered users can post?

believe me, some of the spammers and trolls register - keeps the moderators on their toes.

Ok, probably not possible, but can we somehow automatically delete any post with the word kitchen in it (and remotely explode the computer it was sent from)?

I wish

Average 10 per day?
(Whoops, thread drift ;-) )

FredB wrote:You're twisting words. "Gun control" in normal usage refers to small arms, not howitzers. Age limits apply to many items in common use.

Sure, but the fact is the US has 'gun control' in some form, just as everywhere else does, and the vast majority of the population are perfectly comfortable with it - or at least sufficiently relaxed that they aren't concerned about doing anything to change it.

That every debate ends up with 'USA doesn't have any gun control, your country has total gun control' being thrown at non-Americans makes the whole thing facile and pointless.

David Levene wrote:...Average 10 per day?
(Whoops, thread drift ;-) )

and I am deleting about the same daily average - why are UK-based kitchen resellers so desperate?

The kitchen resellers are probably just a pimply faced kid in his basement being paid with a bag of pot to dump adverts where he can.

I'm definitely pro-2nd amendment, and am getting fed up with all the interference with our sport. However, sometimes I just want to read up on technical issues without getting all riled about the liberal BS.

"Hell no" from me.
I have always enjoyed Target Talk not just for the technical discussions but precisely because it is (largely) free of politics. There are a large number of guns and / or politics forums where firearms legislation can be discussed all day, every day. Inevitably, many threads on those forums dissolve into angry bitter arguments between polarised factions.

I agree with James's comment...

... every debate ends up with 'USA doesn't have any gun control, your country has total gun control' being thrown at non-Americans

This is an international forum with members from across the world. For better or for worse, each country has a set of laws governing the civilian ownership of firearms which is unique to them, molded by whatever political, historical or social forces were dominant at the time. While a compare-and-contrast discussion about laws pertaining to different countries can be interesting, these inevitably seem to turn into "my" laws are better than "your" laws or otherwise a discussion about the 2nd Amendment which has little relevance to those outside of the United States. These discussions also often involve one side passing judgment on another society's level of "freedom" or "oppression" based purely on their gun laws which some find hurtful and will react against. Like a religious discussion that results in a claim that "my" faith or denomination is "correct" and yours is “wrong”, no good can come of it.