BowFishing Country banner

21 - 40 of 54 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,176 Posts
Lance I am with you, people problem, not a gun problem. The only thing I see that should maybe be changed is changing the age requirement to buy an assault rifle to 21.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,063 Posts
Discussion Starter #22
does the school pay the resource officer or are they paid by police or sheriffs dept. the ones in my schools are paid by their depts
Well the school system would have to reimburse them in some sort of way correct? Or does the PD just have an office stationed at the school?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,063 Posts
Discussion Starter #23
Lance I am with you, people problem, not a gun problem. The only thing I see that should maybe be changed is changing the age requirement to buy an assault rifle to 21.
Which will help for sales of new firearms. Not used. You can find anyone with a flyer at the local gas station advertising a shotgun or rifle for sale. They dont do FFL, background checks, proof of ID, in the used firearms sales game cash is king.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
884 Posts
i think they are just assigned a post at a school just like they are assigned an area.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,063 Posts
Discussion Starter #25
i think they are just assigned a post at a school just like they are assigned an area.
Gotcha. I didn't know that. That makes sense tho
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
346 Posts
i think they are just assigned a post at a school just like they are assigned an area.
Ya they are generally just assigned. Departments just eat the cost because its seen as a good thing to have in schools so their officers can interact with kids
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,020 Posts
Any type of restrictions only hinder legal purchasing of a firearm from a ffl, if someone is deranged and their intent is to kill people does anyone think that just cause they get can't buy one at Bass pro they'd just change their mind and not go on a murderous rampage? The only people who ever follow gun laws are the law abiding citizens that aren't going on shooting sprees.
I don't care for the "you have to get a driver's license why don't they do that with guns" excuse, the second amendment says I have a right to own guns, nowhere does anything say I have a right to own a car, it's a privilege. Any time people start confusing rights with privileges bad things start happening.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
357 Posts
Any type of restrictions only hinder legal purchasing of a firearm from a ffl, if someone is deranged and their intent is to kill people does anyone think that just cause they get can't buy one at Bass pro they'd just change their mind and not go on a murderous rampage? The only people who ever follow gun laws are the law abiding citizens that aren't going on shooting sprees.
I don't care for the "you have to get a driver's license why don't they do that with guns" excuse, the second amendment says I have a right to own guns, nowhere does anything say I have a right to own a car, it's a privilege. Any time people start confusing rights with privileges bad things start happening.

Agreed
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
884 Posts
I agree as well but a lot of these firearms where purchased legally
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
7,652 Posts
A couple fact:

The population of the US is approx 250 million + people and on that day of the Florida School shooting it was (1) person out of a population of 250 million that personally committed that evil deed...

Even though is refered to as “Gun Violence” it’s actually “people violence” caused by “violent people” the gun did nothing

When it’s a school shooting it’s all about the Gun, when it’s a cop shooting it’s all about the person....

Per the CDC statistics more children are killed at school due to playground and sports injuries than school shootings but don’t hear any outcry about eliminating swing sets and monkey bars....

In history there have been at least 3 school bus accidents that killed more children than sandy hook......

The first US report school schooting was the Pontiac School Rebellion in 1764 in Pennsylvania where the school teacher and 10 students were murdered by 4 Lenape Indians, all with primitive weapons and have had school shootings thru history ever since, this is not a new phenomenon

There are no exact numbers that could find but the estimated number of schools private and public in the US is approx 90-95,000 schools in the US with a very small percentage ever having an issue....

The California San Bernardino shooter bought his gun legally in Cali and was also a “California compliant” gun

I watched the President round table discussion today, IMO, you may have to give a little to gain a lot, to show your “doing something” banning bump stocks is a non issue, either is raising the age to buy an AR type weapon to 21 same as a handgun. Saw the people from DC with their story of shootings or violence in the city, but like NY, Chicago Washington DC is a non gun ownership city so obvious anyone doing shootings is a criminal....let’s enforce our current laws

It is a complex issue and the younger generation appears to be gaining momentum with staging school walkouts until our legislators act, or more of that Bernie mentality that only their beliefs matter and everyone else is wrong...

The one kid at the WH meeting that cited Australia and # of school shootings in Australia as zero was real scary since Australia instituted full gun confiscation.....

Amazing how at the international Olympic Games going on now, it’s not about the gun when men and women 30 skiers take off with a gun on their back during the Biathlon ,no one with the gun started shooting spectators, the Russians didn’t start shooting US competitors, the spectators weren’t scared or worried with 30 guns in plain view and being used in front of everyone, with each person shooting 20 times... the gun owners/competitors are responsible people and nothing to be afraid of. The same as all the majority of other US gun owners that have no inclination to ever do anything violent with ANY firearm much less an assault weapon

I also put a lot of blame on the media, and movie industry, take many years ago the classic movie Psycho were the shower murder scene was a knifing shadow and blood running down the drain which kept people from sleeping and thought to be very disturbing at the time to the reality violence showed today not even on film but even on prime time TV now,
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
147 Posts
Scary to me is how the anti gun propganda has even converted some on a bowfishing site. " changing the age requirement to buy an assault rifle to 21. " Assault rifle? A semi auto cannot be an assault rifle. AR stands for ARmalite platform, not Assault Rifle. Repeat a lie enough and people will eventually believe it. Another, gun control advocate. No, they are anti-gun. If they could, they would have them all banned.

Letting teachers carry is not the same as "arming teachers", i.e, forcing teachers to carry. No one, absolutely no one, is pushing for that. A murdering SOB is going to shoot the guy with the gun first - the known cop or guard. The point of allowing teachers/staff to carry is that a murdering SOB has no idea which of them might fight back. As it stands now, that murdering SOB knows that NO ONE is allowed to fight back.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
147 Posts
Banning bump stocks is a no brainer... I didn't know they were even legal until after the vegas shooting. Turns out Obama's ATF made them legal in 2010. Another feather in their hat, aside from selling guns to Mexican Cartels. But ban bump stocks, period. Not "bump stocks plus anything else that might allow a semi auto to shoot faster". That is a wide open invite for banning all sorts of legitimate parts/ideas.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
7,652 Posts
Scary to me is how the anti gun propganda has even converted some on a bowfishing site. " changing the age requirement to buy an assault rifle to 21. " Assault rifle? A semi auto cannot be an assault rifle. AR stands for ARmalite platform, not Assault Rifle. Repeat a lie enough and people will eventually believe it. Another, gun control advocate. No, they are anti-gun. If they could, they would have them all banned.

Letting teachers carry is not the same as "arming teachers", i.e, forcing teachers to carry. No one, absolutely no one, is pushing for that. A murdering SOB is going to shoot the guy with the gun first - the known cop or guard. The point of allowing teachers/staff to carry is that a murdering SOB has no idea which of them might fight back. As it stands now, that murdering SOB knows that NO ONE is allowed to fight back.
Couple thoughts on arming teachers,which think is a good idea if the teacher actually agrees and trains or shows competency for it, if the SHTF and there is a shooter on campus and a teacher or teachers are armed and in a possible shootout and armed with a handgun or rifle or even shotgun, there needs to be a way for the cops or SWAT to identify the real shooter if even still on campus from the armed protectors.... could turn bad if an armed teacher got shot by the good guys....

But to take a real bowfishing analogy to the gun debate, pretty much everyone knows how the anti’s had video from cownose stingray tournaments and was able to get bills introduced into the MD house and senate proposing a total ban on stingray hunting with a bow. I had discussions with heads of DNR and went to meetings on the bill at the statehouse and in the opinion of DNR this was a non issue and low on their radar BUT their hands were tied when this emotional issue was passed in House and Senate and sent to DNR for consideration of regulation. We ended up with NO ban on hunting stingrays, NO season which was proposed during mating season of the cownose ray, The wording was for cownose only not southern rays or any other species of ray, and the only thing that got accomplished was a Ban on cownose ray bowfishing tournaments of which there was only ever 1 publicized one in the state... I even proposed to head DNR officials a $5 bowfishing permit to gauge how many actual bowfisherman the state had,and that never happened, but the Antis were claiming victory and a win were happy about their outcome but everyone is still free and able to come hunt stingrays on the Chesapeake bay during the summer months, people are able to run guiding trips bowfishing for stingrays with no issue, just the one public tournament was basically eliminated and due to all the publicity was basically done without the official legislation ....so give up bump stocks, I am 55 and son is 26 so a 21 age requirement to buy an AR, AK, SKS,Barret etc....and for a handgun which is already in effect doesn’t really infringe or make any difference but can let the other side feel that they have accomplished something..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
644 Posts
Banning bump stocks is wrong, it is a novelty, accuracy is gone when using one, the wording will turn to buffer tubes, scopes, triggers ect., and evenyually all firearms.
If the spoiled millinnials accomplish this bow fishing and many other sports will be gone, because we all know that shooting carp will soon become MURDER, I can see the Carp lives matter protest's now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
163 Posts
Well the school system would have to reimburse them in some sort of way correct? Or does the PD just have an office stationed at the school?
Most school systems, in Central Virginia at least, reimburse the local departments for the costs of the officers serving in the schools. It didn't start out like that though. Originally they were assigned there after incidents started gaining attention in the mid 90's, but once budget cuts came and departments threatened to pull officers out due to manpower issues, the schools stepped up and said they would front the money from then on so they would be "guaranteed" coverage. Nowadays regardless of money, once a department places an officer in a school, liability wise, they could never pull them and risk the fallout if something tragic happened.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
Banning bump stocks is a no brainer... I didn't know they were even legal until after the vegas shooting. Turns out Obama's ATF made them legal in 2010. Another feather in their hat, aside from selling guns to Mexican Cartels. But ban bump stocks, period. Not "bump stocks plus anything else that might allow a semi auto to shoot faster". That is a wide open invite for banning all sorts of legitimate parts/ideas.
Why is banning bump stocks a no brainer and what will it accomplish?
You sounded like you were completely against gun control in your first post. You followed it up with a post that suggest you support some gun control. It sounds like that anti gun propaganda you brought up may be rubbing off on you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,118 Posts
Ok, everyone is stating an opinion so here's mine. Agree or disagree with it, your choice. I enjoy hunting as much as the next guy but I fail to see why anyone would want to own a semi-automatic rifle for hunting or pleasure shooting. They're expensive to purchase and the ammunition is too. Why would you want it, just to say you have it? Do you really need it? The gun companies love it I know that. Gun manufacturers appreciate it and so does their bottom line. It amazes me that you have a tool that is meant for a specific task and when someone uses it for that task everyone is taken back by it. Statistically it's just a drop in the bucket when a shooting like this takes place based on the population, it's unfortunate but true. You can justify owning semi-auto firearms any way you want and using the second amendment as your right to own them is an excuse for keeping them in circulation so that they're available to people that are mentally ill, [email protected]@holes, out to make a political statement or whatever else to further their agenda or just plain have no business with them. You can say that a more thorough vetting will eliminate some of this from happening, that too is nonsense, that's like trying to throw a bandaide on the problem. The simple fact is that people want to feel safe and that's why we have a society so that the weak can be protected by the strong. We maintain that society by using force. People need to step up and protect themselves and their own. You don't want to take a chance of having your kids exposed to the remote possibility of being shot at school then home school them. You don't want to have them killed in a car wreck then don't put them in a vehicle. What I'm getting at here is life is a gamble and sooner or later the odds will be against you based on exposure. People want to cower in fear and let life pass them by, I'm sorry but I'll take my chances. When your number is up it's up and there isn't a thing you can do about it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
Ok, everyone is stating an opinion so here's mine. Agree or disagree with it, your choice. I enjoy hunting as much as the next guy but I fail to see why anyone would want to own a semi-automatic rifle for hunting or pleasure shooting. They're expensive to purchase and the ammunition is too. Why would you want it, just to say you have it? Do you really need it? The gun companies love it I know that. Gun manufacturers appreciate it and so does their bottom line. It amazes me that you have a tool that is meant for a specific task and when someone uses it for that task everyone is taken back by it. Statistically it's just a drop in the bucket when a shooting like this takes place based on the population, it's unfortunate but true. You can justify owning semi-auto firearms any way you want and using the second amendment as your right to own them is an excuse for keeping them in circulation so that they're available to people that are mentally ill, [email protected]@holes, out to make a political statement or whatever else to further their agenda or just plain have no business with them. You can say that a more thorough vetting will eliminate some of this from happening, that too is nonsense, that's like trying to throw a bandaide on the problem. The simple fact is that people want to feel safe and that's why we have a society so that the weak can be protected by the strong. We maintain that society by using force. People need to step up and protect themselves and their own. You don't want to take a chance of having your kids exposed to the remote possibility of being shot at school then home school them. You don't want to have them killed in a car wreck then don't put them in a vehicle. What I'm getting at here is life is a gamble and sooner or later the odds will be against you based on exposure. People want to cower in fear and let life pass them by, I'm sorry but I'll take my chances. When your number is up it's up and there isn't a thing you can do about it.
Eshaw,

I agree with you that we are all entitled to our own opinions and ours do differ. That being said, while I agree that you can have the opinion that you don't want a semi-automatic rifle, I don't think it is your (or anybody else's) right to tell others they can't enjoy them. They use the same ammunition as any other rifle chambered for the same caliber so it is no more expensive and a quality AR doesn't cost any more then a quality bolt gun. I have both AR-15s and an AR-10. I use them for target shooting (including shooting competitively at 600 yards against single shot and bolt action rifles), plinking, varmint hunting and big game hunting. I also have bolt actions, single shots, and lever actions. One of the things I like most about the AR platform is it's adaptability. With one rifle that will collapse to fit in a 36" backpack case, I have a rifle that myself, m wife or my 11 year old granddaughter can all use accurately and comfortably. Semi-automatics also have less recoil then a comparable rifle with a different action which also makes it easier for those of smaller stature to handle and enjoy. What is being done at these 'gun free zones' could be done with a single action revolver because their is no one to oppose them. The problem is not the tool but the individuals that choose to misuse the tool.

Also, one thing that easily gets lost in these conversations is that the second amendment is not about target shooting, plinking or hunting. I was written with the sole purpose of insuring that we, the citizens of this country, had the right and ability to be armed as well as the government to insure that it could never get too strong to overpower the citizenry. While I know this won't happen anytime soon, I believe that means we should be allowed to own any weapons the government owns. That means tanks, fighter planes, fully automatic weapons, grenades, etc. so that we may defend ourselves from them should they try to overstep their bounds. I personally believe that the founding fathers were smart enough to understand that the arms of the day would not always be muskets and cannons either. And, if they didn't want this, they would have worded it so we could have muskets, but not rifles or cannons, both more deadly weapons that were available in their era.

Sorry for this long rant, I just couldn't stop once I started.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
644 Posts
Why is banning bump stocks a no brainer and what will it accomplish?
You sounded like you were completely against gun control in your first post. You followed it up with a post that suggest you support some gun control. It sounds like that anti gun propaganda you brought up may be rubbing off on you.
I don't support any gun control, if you are a responsible American you should be allowed to own anything you desire.
What I was saying is, let them take one thing away, they will continue to take more.
 
21 - 40 of 54 Posts
Top