Gun control?

[swampthang]

I enjoy hunting and sport shooting. I believe everyone has the right to protect themself. I have taken hunter safety classes as a kid and have all my paperwork and abide by the laws and rules as close as humanly possible. With all the terrible shootings happening and legal mubo jumbo we are all hearing I'd like to start a thread just on this subject so as to not clutter and hijack other threads.

What is everyones opinions on this? If Gov. was to ban the sell of "Assault" rifles there would still be millions of high capacity rifles still in the publics hands so that would not solve anything. Just look at how many 3wheelers are still around. If they banded certain calibar bullets people could still reload and new ammo would just be smuggled as well as guns like drugs are. If bad guys want them they will get them.

I really see no use for high capacity rifles, shotguns,handguns for anything other than combat. Although they are alot of fun you don't really need a 100 round hopper for a shotgun unless you fighting off a huge pack of wolves or maybe Saquatches.:lol: With that being said There is plenty of violent crimes that are committed with revolvers and lower count rifles and shotguns. Violents happenes without high capacity weapons but it just makes the violent worse.

The problem nowdays isnt guns its people. If all guns were banded tomorrow all this evil would still be happening. But how do we fix this???

[jays375]

Any laws passed gets there foot in the door for more.Remember the simple 50 cal stuff they wanted to pass?What we need to do is fix are society first.

[riverrat]

My question is, say like in the 50's, there was guns, but no mass shootings like this one, or at least not at the frequency wet are seeing today. What changed in America from then until now. (I believe most of us already know the answer).

Here's the thing, there is an invention that is responsible for way more deaths than the gun, yet the liberals don't attack it like they guns. That invention is called the wheel. we should also ban spoons because people are too fat.

My heart goes out to those people. As the details come out, we will learn there was many signs that he was about to lose it.

[El Camexican]

If Big Brother (AKA The U.N.) were to ever confiscate every gun and bullet on this planet the news headlines would one day read: “Knife wielding maniac stabs 6 pre-school children because his mama didn’t raise him right”. Then when the knives were all taken away by those still claiming to know best some nut would pick up a wood club and the headlines would still be the same. No one single firearm is more dangerous than the next… in the right hands. Granted my wife would have a better chance at taking someone out with a 12 gauge than she would with a 9mm, but I also know people that can hit things with a pistol that most of us would have trouble hitting with a .308 and a scope. Should those people be locked up and punished for knowing how to use a weapon? Me thinks not. Guns are not the problem. A decaying society is, but that’s harder to fix than it is to point the finger of blame at a gun, so here come round 78 of “We need more gun control”. My thought on this latest killing spree is that if just one teacher would have been packing it might have saved a lot of lives last week. I wish just one politician out there had the testicular fortitude to stand up and say “Everyone should be educated on how to handle firearms and should carry a gun at all times to help save lives when one single nut job snaps and needs to be put down”

[mcgyver331]

It's the people not the weapons. but what to do?

[Scootertrash]

Here is a listing of school shootings since the 1700's

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shootings_in_the_United_States


El Canuckxican is 100% right. Instead of demonizing firearms we should be teaching responsible gun handling.

Psychos will use whatever weapon is convenient:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/12/22-kids-slashed-in-china-elementary-school-knife-attack/

[briano]

I think everyone that can legally own and carry a gun should do so. There would be a lot less crap going down if the crazies knew the other people are armed. As far as the schools, during the summers off the teachers should be required to take a firearms training class and get a concealed carry license, and carry in school. All it would have taken is the principal or a teacher to see this nut job breaking into the school with a gun and someone from the faculty could have stopped him. I just read a story about a principal running out to his car to get his pistol to stop an attack and it worked, can't remember exactly where I saw it, I followed a few different links from our local paper.

So as far as banning guns, no way. Guns don't kill, nut jobs kill. If there are no guns they will use something else.

[Thorpe]

We don't need more gun control... We need stupid people control!

All this new gun control bs will not stop crime, it does not slow down the criminals with their stolen guns, all it does is punish the law abiding citizens who buy their guns legally.

[CRAZY70MAN]

Laws will not stop criminals. Look at the DUI offenders???? 6-7-8- 12 time repeat offenders??? Criminals and crazy people do not and never will give a F#@$ about laws. I have the right to defend myself and own whatever firearm I damn well want to is the way I see it. What's next....banning 747's or jet airplanes?? After all, the jets murdered all the people on 9/11 right?? Oh, no that's right! That would have been the crazy pieces of crap terrorist that were responsible for flying them into the towers Where was that ban at huh??? The end result is the same no matter what the weapon. It is the act not the weapon. Remember "Give satan an inch...and he'll be a ruler" My old 6th grade nun beat that one in my head if I remember correctly??? You are seeing the end of the good old USA as we once knew it. I hope some of us have enough fight left in ourselves to possibly prolong the existence of this beautiful country:cry:

[swampthang]

What's strange is with all these public shootings you never hear much about anyone having a gun on them to stop the crazed gunman. Every state but Illinois(which is working on it as we speak) has some kind of Concealed carry law.

[El Camexican]

The Internet is on fire with this issue today. When a deranged wife runs over her lover with a car, or a drunk kills someone you don’t hear people calling for a ban on cars, or booze, just tougher laws for the criminals that committed the act. We as three wheeler fanatics have firsthand experience with Big Brother stepping in and telling us what we can and can’t buy. To ban guns in an effort to control the actions of the mentally unstable would be in effect the same as banning trikes to try eliminate the actions of unqualified drivers. The only difference is that the gun using killers would pick up knives and the incompetent drivers would (do) buy quads. NOTE: I’m not implying in any way that quad drivers are incompetent, only that an incompetent driver has full access to them at the local dealers, just as knives are sold at Wal-Mart to whoever has the cash in hand.

[swampthang]

Another thing to consider is alot of these mass shootings are suicide missions. These people have already made up there mind there going to die. The fear of someone else gunning them down prolly isn't too intemidating or detering. Also another thing to think about is these shooting are lead by men. I havn't seen a woman try anything yet... Its such a confusing subject and very sad.

Like I said earlier this is a people problem. But how to fix it?

[El Camexican]

Also another thing to think about is these shooting are lead by men.

Oddly enough I only know one person who ever shot and killed someone outside of a war and it was a women that pulled the trigger after Prince Charming beat the crud out of her with his unregistered fist for the umpteenth time.

[CRAZY70MAN]

The Internet is on fire with this issue today. When a deranged wife runs over her lover with a car, or a drunk kills someone you don’t hear people calling for a ban on cars, or booze, just tougher laws for the criminals that committed the act. We as three wheeler fanatics have firsthand experience with Big Brother stepping in and telling us what we can and can’t buy. To ban guns in an effort to control the actions of the mentally unstable would be in effect the same as banning trikes to try eliminate the actions of unqualified drivers. The only difference is that the gun using killers would pick up knives and the incompetent drivers would (do) buy quads. NOTE: I’m not implying in any way that quad drivers are incompetent, only that an incompetent driver has full access to them at the local dealers, just as knives are sold at Wal-Mart to whoever has the cash in hand.


I am with ya there. Funny how a motorcycle shop will sell an 18 year old kid a crotch rocket that will do 200 mph?? And not even sell em a helmet? Talk about a death sentence!! 900 lb 4 wheel drive 4 wheelers and razor this and rhino that with 70-80 100 hp??? And you see "KIDS" freakin driving them like maniacs?? I will never understand the 3 wheeler ban and it leaves me bitter as someone said above when the government which is trillions in debt and has not a clue on real life tries to tell me what I can and can't do. People are fed up........and I am one of those people.

[ezmoney1979]

I am with ya there. Funny how a motorcycle shop will sell an 18 year old kid a crotch rocket that will do 200 mph?? And not even sell em a helmet? Talk about a death sentence!! 900 lb 4 wheel drive 4 wheelers and razor this and rhino that with 70-80 100 hp??? And you see "KIDS" freakin driving them like maniacs?? I will never understand the 3 wheeler ban and it leaves me bitter as someone said above when the government which is trillions in debt and has not a clue on real life tries to tell me what I can and can't do. People are fed up........and I am one of those people.
You guys really lose me when you start comparing guns to cars and motorcycles. Does that really make sence to you? This is part of what makes "gun nuts" look, ummmmm............ dumb. Some people say "why do you own a 500 three wheeler" and I agree, just like an assault rifle it is dangerous in the wrong hands and a bit excessive. However I can't pick up my three wheeler and shoot a crowd of innocent people with it. (Ok, it does shoot non-lethal sand) So I do understand the rediculous hobbies us guys have. But the worn out chant of "why don't we ban cars too" is moronic. Cars are a neccesity, guns are not. Pretty simple.

[dcreel]

If that 20 year old kid had gotten into his mom's car and crashed into a group of 30 or 40 people on purpose to harm or kill them.. Do you understand now? They are inanimate objects.. without the evil will of a human to command them to harm people they just sit there..

And you are wrong.. My gun is a necessity in the pursuit of protection for my family.

Gun Control is a scapegoat for the thing that people really don't want to discuss.. The total breakdown of family, morals, and values.. People are breeding morons.. Letting the television and schools raise their children. The chicken had to come to roost sooner or later..

[ezmoney1979]

If that 20 year old kid had gotten into his mom's car and crashed into a group of 30 or 40 people on purpose to harm or kill them.. Do you understand now? They are inanimate objects.. without the evil will of a human to command them to harm people they just sit there..

And you are wrong.. My gun is a necessity in the pursuit of protection for my family.

Well Doug, he didn't, he used an assualt rifle. Maybe I want nuclear weapons in my closet, if I don't use them on people, all is well, right.......
My point was that "gun nuts" are losing the arguement, just like how you made up a scenario that didn't happen in order to debate.
I thought I would add that that I own two guns (10/22 and 12 gauge auto) and I am against any more laws of any kind, all they do is restrict our freedoms. The real problem with this nation, are the idiots living in it. What a bunch of Walmart dwelling, government dependent, dumbsh*ts this place has become. I can barely stand to go out in public anymore.:beer

[tri again]

What's strange is with all these public shootings you never hear much about anyone having a gun on them to stop the crazed gunman. Every state but Illinois(which is working on it as we speak) has some kind of Concealed carry law.

Wasn't there a concealed carry guy that aimed at the Mall shooter in Oregon?
He hesitated because of people behind the target and the shooter offed himself at that point.
well, that's what the local news said.

I grabbed my piece yesterday before going shopping and then left it realizing that EVERYone around here is carrying so I honestly felt safe enough to leave mine at home.


side note, if the shooter was truly KA razy, he would've pulled that stunt in downtown freakin' Oakland or south Chicago.


Which brings me to the next concept.
Go outside, shoot in the air, act nutts and the cops will shoot you.
It's called "suicide by cop."

[bmanley]

Forks and spoons made me Fat, which will eventually kill me. Ban them and I will continue to eat without them.

[tri again]

[QUOTE=swampthang;1179553]Another thing to consider is alot of these mass shootings are suicide missions. These people have already made up there mind there going to die. The fear of someone else gunning them down prolly isn't too intemidating or detering. Also another thing to think about is these shooting are lead by men. I havn't seen a woman try anything yet... Its such a confusing subject and very sad.


What really, is our biggest fear?
The ever popular suicide bomber, eh?
They don't need guns at all and do a better job at getting their point across.

How did anyone ever even comprehend the kamikazi at Pearl?
An enemy that we can;t even try to beat. They kill themselves fer chrissake.

Big question, is how do we make it better.

[Thorpe]

This subject pisses me off. It is ignorant as hell. You know why I don't shoot people? Because I am not mental, I know it's wrong, I respect life... Does it matter if hi-cap mags are no longer legal? No. Then the mentals will take 3 guns each holding 10... It's not "more gun control"... It's stupid people... This kids dumb mother didn't have her guns locked up. She knew her son was touched in the head, and yet what did she do? NOTHING... Probably the same way she raised her pos kid... The gun, the trike, the car, the pencil, the tube sock... Not a single one will kill you, without some sick sob on the other end. Guns aren't only a necessity, but my 2nd amendment right!

[ctk]

Well Doug, he didn't, he used an assualt rifle. Maybe I want nuclear weapons in my closet, if I don't use them on people, all is well, right.......
My point was that "gun nuts" are losing the arguement, just like how you made up a scenario that didn't happen in order to debate.
I thought I would add that that I own two guns (10/22 and 12 gauge auto) and I am against any more laws of any kind, all they do is restrict our freedoms. The real problem with this nation, are the idiots living in it. What a bunch of Walmart dwelling, government dependent, dumbsh*ts this place has become. I can barely stand to go out in public anymore.:beer

Shooter did not use an "assaualt" rifle. Look up the actual defintion of "assaualt" rifle, not the defintion the uninformed media uses.

[Scootertrash]

Well Doug, he didn't, he used an assualt rifle. Maybe I want nuclear weapons in my closet, if I don't use them on people, all is well, right.......
My point was that "gun nuts" are losing the arguement, just like how you made up a scenario that didn't happen in order to debate.
I thought I would add that that I own two guns (10/22 and 12 gauge auto) and I am against any more laws of any kind, all they do is restrict our freedoms. The real problem with this nation, are the idiots living in it. What a bunch of Walmart dwelling, government dependent, dumbsh*ts this place has become. I can barely stand to go out in public anymore.:beer



just like how you made up a scenario that didn't happen in order to debate

Just like you made up a scenario that is IMPOSSIBLE to counter Doug's example of something that actually could happen, and probably has? Maybe not for 20 kids, but the point still remains that it could happen.

I'm gonna take a wild guess here and assume you don't approve of "assault rifles", correct me if I'm wrong.

Here, let me help you with that "assault rifle" thing.....
From Wiki:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_rifle


An assault rifle is a select-fire (either fully automatic or burst capable) rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine.
And

The term assault rifle is a translation of the German word Sturmgewehr (literally "storm rifle", as in "to storm a position"). The name was coined by Adolf Hitler

The murderer in this incident (and many others where the AR15 was used) WAS NOT USING AN ASSAULT RIFLE (caps and bold for emphasis not anger) Read the definition again and familiarize yourself with it so you at least sound like you know what you are talking about. The reason Democrats, Liberals, and lefties use the term is because it scares people who don't take the time to understand what a real assault rifle is


Cars are a neccesity, guns are not. Pretty simple.

Cars aren't a necessity, they are a convenience. People got around just fine by walking and by bicycle before cars were invented, much like people used muskets for hunting before repeating rifles and then semi automatic rifles were invented.

Hell, ya know what, you're right. Guns aren't a necessity. Why hunt when you can buy meat at the supermarket? Just think of all the accidental shootings by semi automatic hunting rifles and shotguns that would be avoided.

From MADD:

http://www.madd.org/statistics/

In 2010, 211 children were killed in drunk driving crashes. Out of those 211 deaths, 131 (62 percent) were riding with the drunk driver.
(National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. “Traffic Safety Facts 2010: Alcohol Impaired Driving” Washington DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 2011.)

Drunk driving is illegal

http://http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/809762.pdf

Motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death for children of every age
from 2 to 14 years old (based on 2001 figures, which are the latest mortality data
currently available from the National Center for Health Statistics).

In the United States, an average of 6 children 0-14 years old were killed and 694
were injured every day in motor vehicle crashes during 2003.
(That's 2,190 kids killed and 253,310 injured in just 2003)

Are vehicles such a necessity that we can justify the deaths of this many children?

Three wheelers aren't a necessity and kids get hurt on them even after the "ban". Why don't we turn them all in, you know, for the children? OH! Because three wheelers are important to you, even tho others may not approve, or think they are scary and deadly, or don't understand why anybody would need them or want them You know, like ARs, AKs, and 30 round magazines?

It's no one else's business, especially the government's, what a responsible law abiding citizen chooses to own or what they choose for a hobby, nor is it anyone elses business to decide what limitations should be placed on a private persons freedoms based on what they think someone "needs" or because they "can't understand why someone would want one".

ezmoney-why did you dislike ctk's post? He is telling the truth. Look up the definition yourself.

[300rman]

If you have a Mob coming down your street, do you want a 3 shot Shotgun or a 100 round Hopper?

[CRAZY70MAN]

You may ask one day why you need 30 rounds if you are still alive to ask after your 6 shot revolver ran out of lead. I wonder what the armed guards will use to guard the public places in the future??? Bet you arss it ain't gonna be a 9mm handgun. It will be the same gun they are telling you and I there is no need for. The ar-15 or similar. I would rather have 30 rounds and never need em' than to have 6 and find out I needed 9 to protect my family.....to little is always to late. The brainwashing continues in America.......broke country with unarmed citizens???? Where do you think this is heading????:wondering Your own neighbor may sell you out for a loaf of bread from the government one day for info that you have guns?? Don't beleive it?? Go on the web and watch the old bread lines in Russia where it took a wheelbarrow of their currency to buy one loaf of bread after standing in line for 3 hours. Never say never

[El Camexican]

Cars are a neccesity, guns are not. Pretty simple.

We had spears long before we had shoes and guns were invented long before there were cars. If no one, and I mean NO ONE had guns then no they wouldn’t be needed, but as long as there is one gun on this planet there needs to be a second one to keep the owner of the first one in check.

And why do people use the term “Gun Nuts” for people who enjoy them? What can’t we be “Gun Aficionados”? Same goes for using the term “Hunters” for people who use guns to commit crimes, it just ain’t right to paint every one with the same dirty brush.

I should also mention that anyone who wants to know what it is like to live in a country where people are forbidden to carry guns can PM me to arraign a personal tour of a country where 50,000 people have died in 6 years by means of acid baths, fire, stabbing and yes, a few bullets.

[CRAZY70MAN]

We had spears long before we had shoes and guns were invented long before there were cars. If no one, and I mean NO ONE had guns then no they wouldn’t be needed, but as long as there is one gun on this planet there needs to be a second one to keep the owner of the first one in check.

And why do people use the term “Gun Nuts” for people who enjoy them? What can’t we be “Gun Aficionados”? Same goes for using the term “Hunters” for people who use guns to commit crimes, it just ain’t right to paint every one with the same dirty brush.

I should also mention that anyone who wants to know what it is like to live in a country where people are forbidden to carry guns can PM me to arraign a personal tour of a country where 50,000 people have died in 6 years by means of acid baths, fire, stabbing and yes, a few bullets.

Very well said from someone who lives it!! Thank you very much for that bro.. My father grew up in the Hitler era in europe and came to this country as a young man seeking a better life. I learned from his horror stories of government this and government that...some really heart wrenching that there is one freedom to never give up...and that is my right to protect myself and my family by any means necessary. I could only imagine the stuff you experience in you neck of the world??????? Man oh man??

[El Camexican]

Very well said from someone who lives it!! Thank you very much for that bro.. My father grew up in the Hitler era in europe and came to this country as a young man seeking a better life. I learned from his horror stories of government this and government that...some really heart wrenching that there is one freedom to never give up...and that is my right to protect myself and my family by any means necessary. I could only imagine the stuff you experience in you neck of the world??????? Man oh man??

My grandfather fled Russia and had stories that I'm sure are similar to those of your father. Before he died he bought me a gun (I was 5) and on his deathbed told my father to never let the government take it away. Sadly those who have failed to learn of the history that lead to America gaining its freedom and that of the peoples who came there to escape the tyranny of other countries seem to be the ones who think the government will protect them if they are disarmed. Heck, if reading a book is too hard, they could just turn on the news and watch what is happening in the Middle East and tell me everyone doesn’t need a rifle in the closet. The Swiss all have government issued guns and its working out for them. :beer

[Scootertrash]

It's called divide and conquer gentlemen:
Find those with the same interest and turn them against their like thinking associates under the belief that they will be spared if they throw their associates under the bus.

Elcamexican knows what he's talking about, his country is one big gun free zone and look at the murders that happen down there, by criminals who don't give a rats ass about laws

[ezmoney1979]

Ok, cut the crap. If you think a car/truck is not a necessity you are mentally unfit to own a bb gun or even a squirt gun. I'm not going to walk (nor ride a horse) 15 miles to work in the winter every morning, and neither is anyone else I know.

The point I was trying to make is the "gun nuts" (sorry but people use "trikeoholic" and "trike nut" on here and it doesnt bother me) arguement always revolves around some fictitious scenario. Where is this "angry mob" or intruders not going down after 6 shots? My neighbor "selling me out for a loaf of bread" ............. WTF is that insane drivel? Where do you people live, I will be sure not to go there. (I do admit I live in a pretty nice, safe area) If the pro gun people stuck to facts instead of resorting to paranoid rants they might not look so bad. Stop trying to justify the high capacity magazines and assault rifles and call it what it is, a fun, dangerous toy that needs to be respected. As much as you would like to believe, you wont be running around with your AR-15 shooting zombies, saving the day during the apocalypse. Stick to the facts, such as- most everyone IS a responsible gun owner and thousands upon thousands of "gun aficianados" enjoy their firearms everyday, safely, without incident.

Scootertrash, thanks for the sarcastic explaination of "assault rifle". Nice try on attempting to educate me as if I had no clue as to what the definition of "assault rifle" is. It reminds me of someone getting bent out of shape when their three wheeler is called a "trike". The fact is that 99.9% of the population calls any gun that looks like an "assault rifle" an assault rifle, go figure. Even my hardcore "gun nut" friends refer to their non "assault rifles", assault rifles. And no, I don't have any problem with "assault rifles", just with some of their unstable users. After all, guns don't kill people.

With all this gun talk it motivated me to go out target shooting with two of my close buddies yesterday. It was an awesome day because it had snowed the night before then got nice and sunny. I hadn't been out shooting in years. We went way up in the mountains and made some fresh tracks, wish I would have got pics. I got to shoot my buddies new (to him) Ruger PC4, pretty sweet carbine! Trust me guys, the last thing I am for is more government regulations. I couldn't imagine someone telling me I can't go out and have the fun I had yesterday.:beer

[oldskool83]

I am not reading all the posts. This is the real problem, unstable people who have seen nothing but the same thing on media (aka news, tv, movies) of people flying off the handle. Each time an unstable person sees these images they are motivated, each time one has a plan to top the other. This is the real problem. Surely guns are everyware now in stores more so then say 50-60 years ago when they were only at gun shops but like everything else the market is flooded, the market is also flooded with bad images of people killing each other...and i am sure everyone has seen an image or movie or tv show this week of death.

media did it to us, and people who cant or dont get help rely on this to help solve their pain.

end of story. forward that to the goverment, and ABC nightly news.

[CRAZY70MAN]

Glad you had fun shooting with your friends. We all seem to have some different views on certain things. That is what makes this still a great country for the time being. All of the above topics have some good info and bring up some great points. I think most of us here know fact from fiction and for the most part are respectable grown men and women with the same hopes,dreams and concerns. What made this country what it is today is the very same element that comes from conversations like these. The will to learn, adapt in good times and bad and to pursue happiness and freedom. I always take away some good points from healthy discussions and give them the benefit of the doubt as I make the best choices I am capable of making for my life. Great to see so many interested in this topic.....it really is a big one. We all have our opinions.......everyones welcome to his or hers. Never stop learning I always say....

[Sneakers]

Interesting read, I wasn't brought up around guns, just hockey sticks and endless games at the hockey rink. I still can't figure out why trikes are banned, or the hassle I have trying to import one from the USA. As for guns I have no use for them and would never have one in my house, thats just me. Pulled off some stats this morning as I find a lot of my friends talking about this up here also. In the USA, in 2011 there were 19,766 suicides by gun, 11,101 homicides by gun, 851 accidental deaths by gun and since 1982 there have been 61 mass killings in the USA - by gun. Sorry gun owners but isn't it time for a discussion at least? When trained Police are involved in a shooting there are some interesting stats also, they have a 75 percent chance of falling into one of four categories within five years following the shooting: divorce, suicide, substance abuse and / or quitting the police force. Anyways lets lift the bann on three-wheelers - have a good day everyone - take care.

[El Camexican]

Would anyone agree with me when I say that guns haven’t evolved much in the past 50 years, but that society as a whole has changed so dramatically over the past 20 years that some people just can’t deal with the pressures of living in today’s world? If you will agree with that can you then accept that imposing restrictions on an inanimate object can’t possibly prevent some whack job from harming his fellow man when a bolt comes loose in his head? Firearms might facilitate violence, but without them there are still knives, beer bottles, bombs and poison available to those willing to harm others. Gun control to a criminal (or mentally disturbed person) is what putting the bottle of rum on the top shelf is to a vertically challenged alcoholic. Both will figure out how to get what they want sooner or later. If the government wants to “FIX” this problem they need to allow the strap back into schools, allow teachers and parents to discipline their children, fail the dumb kinds, stop handing out trophies for last place, put juvenile delinquents into boot camps etc, etc. Preventing future massacres starts with building a better society, but until that happens (and it won’t) I’d want to be as well armed as possible.

And Sneakers, the difference between hockey sticks and guns is that you put the stick down to fight and pick the gun up to fight.:beer

[Mr. Clean]

Here is a listing of school shootings since the 1700's

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shootings_in_the_United_States




They missed one.....there was one at my High School (Pinellas Park) back on February 11, 1988. Assistant Principal was shot in the head point blank and died, two others were shot and survived.

[fabiodriven]

Interesting read, I wasn't brought up around guns, just hockey sticks and endless games at the hockey rink. I still can't figure out why trikes are banned, or the hassle I have trying to import one from the USA. As for guns I have no use for them and would never have one in my house, thats just me. Pulled off some stats this morning as I find a lot of my friends talking about this up here also. In the USA, in 2011 there were 19,766 suicides by gun, 11,101 homicides by gun, 851 accidental deaths by gun and since 1982 there have been 61 mass killings in the USA - by gun. Sorry gun owners but isn't it time for a discussion at least? When trained Police are involved in a shooting there are some interesting stats also, they have a 75 percent chance of falling into one of four categories within five years following the shooting: divorce, suicide, substance abuse and / or quitting the police force. Anyways lets lift the bann on three-wheelers - have a good day everyone - take care.

Unfortunately it is the un-educated demographic that says these things about guns. The thing that "non gun owners" fail to realize right off the bat is this- GUN LAWS DO NOT APPLY TO CRIMINALS. MAKING GUN LAWS MORE STRINGENT FOR LEGAL GUN OWNERS WILL DO NOTHING AGAINST THE PEOPLE USING GUNS ILLEGALLY. YOU NEED TO REALIZE THIS SNEAKERS.

Please take the time to watch this video Sneakers, and thank you for the link Andy- http://www.westernjournalism.com/watch-what-happens-when-a-nation-bans-guns/

I have been in arguments with people against guns many times as of late, and I will tell you now I have yet to lose an argument. It's a very easy argument to win because the people against guns ALWAYS bail out. They always have one last thing to say but will not continue with their argument because they have no ground to stand on. They are wrong, and I don't care how many people I offend by saying this.

When you have a law-abiding citizen who is carrying legally, you have someone who can make a difference in an extreme situation. If a legal gun owner were in any public place and some nut decided he was going to shoot the place up, a licensed person with a legal firearm can LEGALLY end the situation, possibly before the police are called, and possibly before any innocent blood is spilled. People who own guns legally are not the ones going around shooting up innocent people, nut-jobs and criminals are. So what you are suggesting is stripping the rights away from the ones who could very well save your life and the lives of your loved ones.

Picture this- You're in a crowded mall when all of a sudden a man 30 yards away from you pulls a gun and fires off a couple of rounds. Absolute mayhem ensues. What is your reaction? I'm sure you look for cover and try to find a way to escape. That's natural. It's your survival instinct. Let's say you get away, but not everyone else is so lucky. While you're running out of the mall and making your way as far away from there as you possibly can, the police are arriving. They can't go in the mall though. The gunman has taken hostages and he's now executing them one by one. Everyone dies if the police enter the mall. You're just happy to be alive, but you're sickened by the the bodies being dragged out and the people screaming in disbelief of what they've just seen. For this scenario, let's say 25 people died.

Now let's take this very same scenario and replace you with me. I'm an ordinary citizen just like you, or so it seems. The truth is, although I am a citizen, I was once in the army and I have dealt with people who are doing everything in their power to take your life. I have been to combat.

Same scenario, the shots start ringing out. I duck for cover just like you did, but my next move is not the same as what you did. I do not attempt to flee the scene to save my own ass. I have the key to ending this situation in my pocket. The sound of combat actually excites me and draws me in rather than scaring me off. This is an area I have experience in and I can make a difference. I peek out from my cover, see a clear shot, and I fire. The gunman dies and lives are saved. The threat is neutralized and the injured can be tended to by paramedics without concern of their own lives.

Does this seem funny to you? Or far-fetched? Far-fetched it may be, but not impossible. There are MILLIONS of citizens like me around you all day every day, and you are none the wiser. You don't get bothered one bit by any of them, yet you let their choice bother you. You want to neuter the very dog that could one day protect you. Your proposed gun laws will do one thing, and that is to strip those who are willing to save your life of their rights. If legal gun owners can no longer carry, then the good guys will be SEVERLY out-numbered. It's been tried in the past. Take a look at the video I posted above (thanks again Andy) and you post back here to tell me what your thoughts are now. What happened in Australia is not speculation, it's not theory, IT ACCUALLY HAPPENED. It is history. You can either learn from it or choose to ignore it. Either way, it happened.

So please Sneakers, and anyone else who reads this and may be thinking it's time to tighten up the gun laws. Please educate yourselves and THINK about what you are asking for.

If you think my little mall scenario is some fantasy I dreamed up you would be right. Truth be told, nothing would make me happier than to be in a place like that when something like that goes down. I would enjoy that situation whether or not I made it out alive. We need people like me, but I'm not looking for recruits. I'm not asking for anyone to think the way I do or to do what I say I would do, but just appreciate the fact that people like myself are there shopping with you and your family and don't strip us of our right to protect you and everyone else. You may very well end up regretting that decision someday if you do. I had never seen those stats on cops that are involved in gun altercations, but I don't doubt their accuracy. The same thing goes for soldiers. We don't come back the way we left, but we knew what we were signing up for. If being in the military was easy, wouldn't everyone do it? We have our battle scars that will never go away. If in our own eyes our lives are better off being taken than yours and we are willing to die so you could live, why would you want to stop us? I'm not telling you that you should run out and get a gun to save my arse, I'm telling you I can do it an you don't have to. Why would you try to stop me and those like me? Why would you not appreciate what I want to do? I don't care if you don't have a gun and don't want to stand up for yourself, those you love, and all things good, but it's not going to stop me from protecting all of the above. Unless people like you have laws passed against people like me.

And I want a response to this Sneakers, or from anyone else who disagrees with me. I am sick of people walking away from this argument when they learn something instead of admitting they might not have thought things through all the way.

[tri again]

Yes, Mr Fab. I hear you.

As I prepared for my last shopping trip, I picked up my piece, and put it
back under my pillow.

I figured that EVERYone in this town is carrying and I felt VERY safe
being unarmed. Kind of a funny feeling but I knew we'd be safe.

The news said that an armed citizen actually drew a bead on the shooter
in the mall in Oregon, at which point, the shooter offed himself, perhaps
knowing it was over.

[Scootertrash]

The news said that an armed citizen actually drew a bead on the shooter
in the mall in Oregon, at which point, the shooter offed himself, perhaps
knowing it was over.

Always cite your sources my man. ;) Otherwise it's just "someone on the internet said....."

http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-183593571.html

The CCW carrier never fired, the killer offed himself after he saw him. Still ended the incident, without firing a shot, after the killer saw there was someone that could shoot back.

Do a google search "Oregon mall shooter stopped by ccw carrier" and tell me how many major national news outlets ran or are running this story. Can you hear the crickets? I went thru 5 pages and FOUND NO MAJOR NEWS OUTLET REPORTING THAT THAT THE KILLER WAS STOPPED BY SOMEONE CONCEAL CARRYING.

What happened to balanced reporting?

And today Obama announced he wants gun control measures proposed by the end of January?

http://www.startribune.com/184080291.html

[Scootertrash]

If you didn't have vehicles available you would make your home closer to work.

The fact remains that more children are killed by many other things much more often than firearms; like fire, drowning, and suffocation. They are holding babies up and saying "Ban them! It's for the children! Because it evokes emotion.

Using reasoning with liberals doesn't work. They make decisions based on emotion, not facts. We've been telling them for years that responsible gun owners are not the problem and it doesn't matter. They trot out the crazies as examples and say "We only want to regulate these types of firearms and it's BS. They want them all and they are more than happy to take them one gun at a time.

So let's say they do get their assault weapons ban. What happens the next time someone kills some kids with a pair of six shooters? You think their won't be an outrage? WE NEED MORE GUN CONTROL!! MORE BABIES WERE KILLED BY A GUY WIELDING HIGH CAPACITY PISTOLS!!
Using the comment "Guns aren't a necessity" when you are a gun owner only gets used against gun owners: "See, even gun owners admit they don't really need them"



Scootertrash, thanks for the sarcastic explaination of "assault rifle". Nice try on attempting to educate me as if I had no clue as to what the definition of "assault rifle" is. It reminds me of someone getting bent out of shape when their three wheeler is called a "trike". The fact is that 99.9% of the population calls any gun that looks like an "assault rifle" an assault rifle, go figure. Even my hardcore "gun nut" friends refer to their non "assault rifles", assault rifles. And no, I don't have any problem with "assault rifles", just with some of their unstable users. After all, guns don't kill people.


It wasn't a sarcastic explanation, it was the true definition of an assault rifle, the same definition the government uses for it's military arms. People call them that because the media constantly pushes the term in every broadcast about the AR and the AK. Facts are facts ez, a real assault rifle is capable of fully automatic fire, the ARs and AKs sold today are not. The killer did not use an assault weapon in this murder.

I correct my friends when they call them assault rifles because it does no good for the uneducated public to hear them called something they are not, particularly when the media demonizes them constantly.

159637

[SWIGIN]

I am a HUGE fan of gun control and strive to perfect my gun control.

20 rounds from 40 yards with my .22.
http://i49.tinypic.com/11hdlkn.jpg

[bkm]

Here is what two of the most anti gun people in Washington have done in their past regarding guns. Whats good for the goose is obviously not good for the gander.
http://www.mrctv.org/videos/feinstein-1995-her-concealed-carry-permit-i-know-urge-arm-yourself-because-thats-what-i-did
http://freedomslighthouse.net/2012/12/18/democratic-senate-majority-leader-harry-reid-in-2010-extolled-the-virtues-of-guns-i-carried-a-gun-every-place-i-went-but-for-me-guns-are-more-than-that-about-self-defense-video-2010/

[briano]

SWIGIN, looks like you need some more gun control, the whole group is a little high. Lol. Nice group

[ezmoney1979]

If you didn't have vehicles available you would make your home closer to work.



Yeah, youre right. I could put my house on wheels and push it from construction site to construction site. Why didn't I think of that before.
And to sum things up- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xC03hmS1Brk

[swampthang]

Yeah, youre right. I could put my house on wheels and push it from construction site to construction site. Why didn't I think of that before.
And to sum things up- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xC03hmS1Brk

Maybe a RV like cousin Eddie's?

SWIGIN Holly hell thats good grouping if thats a 22 pistol!

[SWIGIN]

SWIGIN, looks like you need some more gun control, the whole group is a little high. Lol. Nice group

I always sight in my guns a little high.....

[tri again]

Always cite your sources my man. ;) Otherwise it's just "someone on the internet said....."

http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-183593571.html

The CCW carrier never fired, the killer offed himself after he saw him. Still ended the incident, without firing a shot, after the killer saw there was someone that could shoot back.

Do a google search "Oregon mall shooter stopped by ccw carrier" and tell me how many major national news outlets ran or are running this story. Can you hear the crickets? I went thru 5 pages and FOUND NO MAJOR NEWS OUTLET REPORTING THAT THAT THE KILLER WAS STOPPED BY SOMEONE CONCEAL CARRYING.

What happened to balanced reporting?

And today Obama announced he wants gun control measures proposed by the end of January?

http://www.startribune.com/184080291.html

Hey there.
No intention to offend, my friend.
Just flashed a snippet on the news.
caught in 1/2 second increments stated that.:

Some legal guy drew a bead and the (alleged) shooter (maybe) hr knew it was 'game over', and offed himself

If I added to the confusion, I apologize wholeheartedly.

Trying to get ready for the end of the world has somewhat distracted me from dissecting the intricacies of errant info.
We'll leave that to the soap opera and NCIS addicts.

Just repeating what I heard on the local news.
Sounds just like what you describe.

Maybe I should STFU and worry about food and water for my family.
...as we all should.

We may be next.

[El Camexican]

I am a HUGE fan of gun control and strive to perfect my gun control.

20 rounds from 40 yards with my .22.
http://i49.tinypic.com/11hdlkn.jpg

Best not let the ultra-Liberal wing of the PPABUATC (Paper Plates Against Being Used A Targets Coalition) see that photo!

[Scootertrash]

Hey there.
No intention to offend, my friend.
Just flashed a snippet on the news.
caught in 1/2 second increments stated that.:

Some legal guy drew a bead and the (alleged) shooter (maybe) hr knew it was 'game over', and offed himself

If I added to the confusion, I apologize wholeheartedly.

Trying to get ready for the end of the world has somewhat distracted me from dissecting the intricacies of errant info.
We'll leave that to the soap opera and NCIS addicts.

Just repeating what I heard.

Maybe I should STFU and worry about food and water for my family.
...as we all should.

It's over.

We may be next.

I just wanted to post the actual story for people so they had an reference. No offense taken, no confusion. ;)

[Scootertrash]

Yeah, youre right. I could put my house on wheels and push it from construction site to construction site. Why didn't I think of that before.
And to sum things up- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xC03hmS1Brk

:rolleyes:

You're missing the whole point here.

The Democrats/Liberals use the bodies of dead children as a soapbox to ban guns. They know damn good and well that law abiding citizens aren't responsible for the massacres. They know that unstable individuals are responsible. They don't care. That argument will not sway them.

You know what else they can be sure of? That the majority of law abiding citizens will follow any laws or bans they pass, and that's all they need to accomplish what they want.

What do you suggest as an alternative argument? I'm all ears.

[Howdy]

:rolleyes:

What do you suggest as an alternative argument? I'm all ears.

Divide the country into 2 parts ( North / South, Or East / West ). Then put all the Anti Gun advocates into one half and the Pro Gun people into the other. Ban the guns in the Anti Gun half and remove gun restrictions in the other half. Come back in 10 years and ask the Anti gun people what they think of Gun Control now.
Howdy

[Scootertrash]

Divide the country into 2 parts ( North / South, Or East / West ). Then put all the Anti Gun advocates into one half and the Pro Gun people into the other. Ban the guns in the Anti Gun half and remove gun restrictions in the other half. Come back in 10 years and ask the Anti gun people what they think of Gun Control now.
Howdy

I like that idea!

[ezmoney1979]

:rolleyes:

You're missing the whole point here.

The Democrats/Liberals use the bodies of dead children as a soapbox to ban guns. They know damn good and well that law abiding citizens aren't responsible for the massacres. They know that unstable individuals are responsible. They don't care. That argument will not sway them.

You know what else they can be sure of? That the majority of law abiding citizens will follow any laws or bans they pass, and that's all they need to accomplish what they want.

What do you suggest as an alternative argument? I'm all ears.

Don't get me wrong Scooter, I think I have made it clear whose side I'm on. Sorry to try to inject a bit of humor into this heated discussion, I apologize. I agree with you on a lot of this and I respect your opinion. I have been speaking to many different people about this topic and the general agreement is- no law could have prevented the recent tragedies that have taken place. I am all ears also, I honestly have not a clue as to what can be done to prevent these occurances, kind of a hopeless feeling really.

[CRAZY70MAN]

Divide the country into 2 parts ( North / South, Or East / West ). Then put all the Anti Gun advocates into one half and the Pro Gun people into the other. Ban the guns in the Anti Gun half and remove gun restrictions in the other half. Come back in 10 years and ask the Anti gun people what they think of Gun Control now.
Howdy

Hey Howdy......could you imagine how many trikes there would be in the pro gun half??? Parts would be easier and chaper to get for our trikes! On a more serious note.....the anti gun portion would not be able to sustain 10 years even. 2-3 years and they would be eating each other...... Great comparison..plain and simple.

[Scootertrash]

ez-lol at your last edit reason! :D

[Sneakers]

As requested Fabiodriven here it goes, my response :) For the record I stated no guns in my house and "sorry gun owners isn't it time for a discussion at least". Oh ya there is no smoking in my house either... In keeping with the hockey theme, the only big four sport where your allowed to drop the gloves and get down to business, your response is offside but I believe you acknowledged that so I'm fine with that. Just because someone has a different opinion than yours it doesn't mean they are part of an "uneducated demographic" just like I don't think you represent that, we have different opinions thats all no big deal. Oh I liked the CAP rant too, I wasn't proposing gun laws I mentioned a discussion at least. I clicked on the video but it bored me after a few minutes so I turned it off, probably because I was getting late for work, dang 3WW in the AM. Your undefeated streak continues as I don't view this as an argument I barely have a position on the matter other than time for a discussion at least... So bailing, no ground to stand on and "they are wrong" doesn't really apply to our thread here. I note your time in the Army, that the sound of combat excites you that this is your area of expertise. Well as I understand it you must be very well trained so this would be an area of expertise and that training no doubt provides you with the background for the discussion on a personal level. There was something about choice, neutered dogs, gun laws being tightened up, and not standing up for myself or family - well that I'm thinking would have been a typo. You don't need a gun to stand up for yourself or family - thats just my hockey background coming out :) I can honestly say the thought of guys packing heat in shopping malls sort of freaks me out, but hey we have a gun registry here in Canada. So Fabiodriven if trailprotrailprotrailprotrailpro does goes down in a mall I hope your close by, because the only thing in my pocket is my wallet, which if we ever meet one day will buy us a cold beer or two :)

[tri again]

Always cite your sources my man. ;) Otherwise it's just "someone on the internet said....."

http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-183593571.html

The CCW carrier never fired, the killer offed himself after he saw him. Still ended the incident, without firing a shot, after the killer saw there was someone that could shoot back.

Do a google search "Oregon mall shooter stopped by ccw carrier" and tell me how many major national news outlets ran or are running this story. Can you hear the crickets? I went thru 5 pages and FOUND NO MAJOR NEWS OUTLET REPORTING THAT THAT THE KILLER WAS STOPPED BY SOMEONE CONCEAL CARRYING.

What happened to balanced reporting?

And today Obama announced he wants gun control measures proposed by the end of January?

http://www.startribune.com/184080291.html

Isn't that the same as what I described?
My tv is usually on KVAL channel 8 local news station for the record.

Unless I'm missing something, which is completely possible.


Yes, Mr Fab. I hear you.

As I prepared for my last shopping trip, I picked up my piece, and put it
back under my pillow.

I figured that EVERYone in this town is carrying and I felt VERY safe
being unarmed. Kind of a funny feeling but I knew we'd be safe.

The news said that an armed citizen actually drew a bead on the shooter
in the mall in Oregon, at which point, the shooter offed himself, perhaps
knowing it was over.

[tri again]

I always sight in my guns a little high.....

One thought is to be able to see the bullseye just above the front bead,
not necessarily directly 'on' it.

[gage]

So I do understand the ridiculous hobbies us guys have. But the worn out chant of "why don't we ban cars too" is moronic. Cars are a neccesity, guns are not. Pretty simple. Exactly. If I may also add owning a gun in 1775 was a little different than owning a gun today.

[Thorpe]

Exactly. If I may also add owning a gun in 1775 was a little different than owning a gun today.

No... Not at all... You are part of the problem! The right (2nd Amendment) doesnt have a date on it... No expiration... I will protect my family reguardless of the date of the calendar (p.s. If the Mayans were so smart, they would still be alive)

How would it be different? People are just a hair more sophisticated than monkeys in the trees flinging their crap at each other... Do me a favor, and explain the difference...

[El Camexican]

we have a gun registry here in Canada

Didn't that get tossed out about a year ago by Harper? Its only pistols that are controlled beyond needing an FAC to buy them no?:wondering

[gage]

No... Not at all... You are part of the problem! The right (2nd Amendment) doesnt have a date on it... No expiration... I will protect my family reguardless of the date of the calendar (p.s. If the Mayans were so smart, they would still be alive)

How would it be different? People are just a hair more sophisticated than monkeys in the trees flinging their crap at each other... Do me a favor, and explain the difference... Idk for obvious reasons I think man, there were no Bushmaster AR-15s, just muskets and muzzle loaders. And aside from the fact that most Americans owned one, they were used more like a fork and spoon than what "most" people use them for today. And not like it matters, but 2nd amendment for most of U.S. history was not interpreted as what it is now, or should I say until 2008 District of Columbia v. Heller. Don't get me wrong though I own a few firearms. :D a few.....

[riverrat]

You guys really lose me when you start comparing guns to cars and motorcycles. Does that really make sence to you? This is part of what makes "gun nuts" look, ummmmm............ dumb. Some people say "why do you own a 500 three wheeler" and I agree, just like an assault rifle it is dangerous in the wrong hands and a bit excessive. However I can't pick up my three wheeler and shoot a crowd of innocent people with it. (Ok, it does shoot non-lethal sand) So I do understand the rediculous hobbies us guys have. But the worn out chant of "why don't we ban cars too" is moronic. Cars are a neccesity, guns are not. Pretty simple.

Cars are not a necessity in all cases, and plenty of people take cars for joy rides, racing, touring, etc. I can drive a truck into a crowd of people and kill just as many as a mass shooter, and it's a whole lot easier than trying to obtain assault weapons and bust into a school. Let's also recognize that cars (aka the wheel) is the #1 killer of children under 13. Where is the ban on this evil wheel then?

Here's the thing, we can go on and on with comparisons, and they are all valid. There are numerous things in life that are not a necessity, are very dangerous, yet there is no assault on them by the "gun control" crowd aka liberals. This is the next step in total government control, that's all it is. I even think that this things are caused by the government in an effort to create this mass-hysteria (fast and furious). Who knows, maybe this kid was even convinced to do this and promised a reward then taken out by a hit man? Conspiracy theories going the other way?

P.S. for many people in the US, guns are a necessity.

Point is, this is America, not Ameriatopia. People should focus on getting rid of all the garbage in this country, like media, advertising, popularity contests, violent realistic games, I could go on and on. It's the pressure of society and mental illness that causes these violent murders. Who knows where the mental illness comes from, probably all the stuff the FDA makes us take.

If you are going to get rid of guns, then you have to get rid of anything that could kill another person to be logically consistent. Put us all in a plastic bubble, and we would still die from something, probably die a lot faster too. What gives the government the right to determine the odds of living/dying?

[Scootertrash]

Isn't that the same as what I described?
My tv is usually on KVAL channel 8 local news station for the record.

Unless I'm missing something, which is completely possible.


Yes, Mr Fab. I hear you.

As I prepared for my last shopping trip, I picked up my piece, and put it
back under my pillow.

I figured that EVERYone in this town is carrying and I felt VERY safe
being unarmed. Kind of a funny feeling but I knew we'd be safe.

The news said that an armed citizen actually drew a bead on the shooter
in the mall in Oregon, at which point, the shooter offed himself, perhaps
knowing it was over.

Yes Sir we are talking about the same incident. ;)

What I meant was to show your source of info when your are referencing a story. It ensures validity for your example. Otherwise a lot of people, in this case anti-gunners, will blow it off as internet rumor, etc, because a large majority of the population will not verify information on their own. Especially if it goes against what they believe.

One other thing, never trust your personal safety to another. Never. The democrats and liberals want to ban guns for one reason and one reason only. Control. They want you dependent upon them for your safety. Do you trust the government to protect you? How's it working out for all those who die in these massacres? They all take place in "Gun Free Zones". How long does it take for th epolice to respond? Too frigging long! If the principal at Sandy Hook had a firearm available to her she would not have had to throw herself in front of the murderer. If she had been carrying one the incident would have more than likely ended before any children were killed.

I borrowed this quote from another forum I belong to:

When the chips are down, when the pressure is on, every creature on the face of the Earth is interested in one thing and one thing only. Its own survival

[Thorpe]

Idk for obvious reasons I think man, there were no Bushmaster AR-15s, just muskets and muzzle loaders. And aside from the fact that most Americans owned one, they were used more like a fork and spoon than what "most" people use them for today. And not like it matters, but 2nd amendment for most of U.S. history was not interpreted as what it is now, or should I say until 2008 District of Columbia v. Heller. Don't get me wrong though I own a few firearms. :D a few.....

Since they don't mention crack and meth in 1775, does that mean it should be legal?

What do "most" people use them for today???

[gage]

Since they don't mention crack and meth in 1775, does that mean it should be legal?

What do "most" people use them for today???Well Im not sure where crack and meth fits into what I said, cocaine was legal in those days until they realized it hurt society more than it helped so? And Idk where to begin on the differences in owning a gun (musket) in those days and a gun (assault rifle) today. To answer your question though, most people I assume use a firearm in sport or for peace of mind. Now what a assault rifle owner does I honestly do not know, my guess would be a glamorous paperweight or attempt to make up for some thing they lack physically? In any case I feel like your missing the point.

[Scootertrash]

Well Im not sure where crack and meth fits into what I said, cocaine was legal in those days until they realized it hurt society more than it helped so? And Idk where to begin on the differences in owning a gun (musket) in those days and a gun (assault rifle) today. To answer your question though, most people I assume use a firearm in sport or for peace of mind. Now what a assault rifle owner does I honestly do not know, my guess would be a glamorous paperweight or attempt to make up for some thing they lack physically? In any case I feel like your missing the point.

Let's clear up one thing AGAIN!
Assault rifles are not available to the public
Assault rifles are capable of fully automatic fire
Fully automatic fire is more than one bullet with one pull of the trigger.

What the hell do you think AR15 and AK rifle owners do? Seriously? Don't be obtuse. Both calibers are legal for hunting deer in a majority of states, not to mention varmint hunting and target practice.


attempt to make up for some thing they lack physically? :rolleyes:

Pretty lame comment. Interesting that you bring it up tho. Ever heard of Sigmund Freud? Google him up. He seems to think it's quite the opposite:

A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."
-Sigmund Freud, General Introduction to Psychoanalysis (1952)

I guess you may be partially right.

If I could hit stuff at 200 yards with my d!ck, I wouldn't need a rifle.

The founders didn't know we'd have typewriters, telephones, radios, TV, and the internet. Maybe we should ban free speech on those too? The only way you can have free speech is if you write with a quill and inkwell and then mail it.

You are the one missing the point. What business is it of yours or the governments to limit what someone does when they are following the rules? What right do you have to say what someone can use for target practice? For hunting? For self protection? None. Zip. Nada. 0

[CRAZY70MAN]

Well Im not sure where crack and meth fits into what I said, cocaine was legal in those days until they realized it hurt society more than it helped so? And Idk where to begin on the differences in owning a gun (musket) in those days and a gun (assault rifle) today. To answer your question though, most people I assume use a firearm in sport or for peace of mind. Now what a assault rifle owner does I honestly do not know, my guess would be a glamorous paperweight or attempt to make up for some thing they lack physically? In any case I feel like your missing the point.

Paperweight???? Man that was wrong. lol.... Your points are respected though. Ever heard that old saying "If my aunt had b@lls....she would be my uncle?? "IF" Let us say "If" you walked outside one day to flee a flood ridden city where gas,food and police were non existent...aka Hurricane Katrina and as you, your wife and 2 kids are walking to your suv to get out before the flood waters strand you, you see 4 men trying to steal your car?? This mind you is your only way out because you made sure your tank was full and you planned for this. The theives on the other hand.....did not and intend to steal your car to survive at any cost....remember...no cops, no one around, just you, your family and 4 pieces of total sh#$ with no regard for you or your life. They see you....they know it is your car and think..."Lets get this f#$ckers keys,money and get out of here. As one reaches for a gun......I raise my ar-15 and say..... I got 31 chances.....how many do you have you piece of crap!!! Would you still think it to be a paperwieght then??? By the way....that guy and his family made it out of New orleans before the flood stranded everyone else....Yes that is a true story from "The armed citizen" in hunting magazines. Who knows the outcome as he said in the article if he had not had enough firepower to convince the thugs they were overpowered?? The funny thing is......he never fired and was a collector only!! Whatever it takes to make you and your family feel safe......bottom line and there is no one who will ever sway me otherwise. Go big or go home is my theory....you may only get one freakin' chance brother.

[Stonewall]

Actually Assault Rifles are available to the public, but they had to have been made before 1986, cost about $20,000 plus a $200 tax stamp, and require a several month waiting period...

I personally use my AR-15 to shoot the muskrats that feel compelled to drain our rice fields for us....

The one thing that every single person that is pro gun control can't answer, is "How is taking the guns away from law abiding citizens going to protect us from criminals with no concern for the law??" I want an answer from a gun control activist to this question!!!

Don't most all of us agree that Benjamin Franklin was one of the wisest men in this nations history? One of my favorite Ben Franklin quotes: "Never trust a government that doesn't trust its citizens with guns."

Gun Control is just a stepping stone in Total Control... The liberals want to be dictators. Now they have their "voting slaves" as my grandfather calls them. These are the people that the government just gives money to. The same money that we work hard for and then they take away.

[gage]

Let's clear up one thing AGAIN!
Assault rifles are not available to the public
Assault rifles are capable of fully automatic fire
Fully automatic fire is more than one bullet with one pull of the trigger.

What the hell do you think AR15 and AK rifle owners do? Seriously? Don't be obtuse. Both calibers are legal for hunting deer in a majority of states, not to mention varmint hunting and target practice.

:rolleyes:

Pretty lame comment. Interesting that you bring it up tho. Ever heard of Sigmund Freud? Google him up. He seems to think it's quite the opposite:

A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."
-Sigmund Freud, General Introduction to Psychoanalysis (1952)

I guess you may be partially right.

If I could hit stuff at 200 yards with my d!ck, I wouldn't need a rifle.

The founders didn't know we'd have typewriters, telephones, radios, TV, and the internet. Maybe we should ban free speech on those too? The only way you can have free speech is if you write with a quill and inkwell and then mail it.

You are the one missing the point. What business is it of yours or the governments to limit what someone does when they are following the rules? What right do you have to say what someone can use for target practice? For hunting? For self protection? None. Zip. Nada. 0lolz Seriously? Are you a assault rifle owner or something? tad sensitive. Listen buddy its my business along with everyone and anyone when assault rifle owners leave their 30 round drum magazines and AR-15s, weapons used in combat zones, for their kids to pick up. Dont change the meaning either that ticks me off, its a assault rifle, automatic, semi doesn't make a dam difference. Its all pretty straight forward, its the same reason "we the people" not the government, have chosen not to allow many various things in our society. Can you own a surface to air missile? Are Cyanide bullets part of the 2nd amendment too? Hey how about a Sherman tank? No? Come on Im just using it to protect my family....

[gage]

Go big or go home is my theory....you may only get one freakin' chance brother. True.:D cant argue with that.

[Stonewall]

lolz Seriously? Are you a assault rifle owner or something? tad sensitive. Listen buddy its my business along with everyone and anyone when assault rifle owners leave their 30 round drum magazines and AR-15s, weapons used in combat zones, for their kids to pick up. Dont change the meaning either that ticks me off, its a assault rifle, automatic, semi doesn't make a dam difference. Its all pretty straight forward, its the same reason "we the people" not the government, have chosen not to allow many various things in our society. Can you own a surface to air missile? Are Cyanide bullets part of the 2nd amendment too? Hey how about a Sherman tank? No? Come on Im just using it to protect my family....

It's legal to own a Sherman tank.....

Why exactly would I need cyanide on my bullets?

And yes it does make a "dam difference". The liberal mass media uses the term "assault rifle" incorrectly in order to scare people who don't know any better. The correct term is Sporting Rifle, the AR-15 is an excellent varmint gun, as well as a fun and fairly affordable target rifle. In a pinch it also makes a dandy self defense tool.

Also, if you're going to attack us sporting rifle owners, could you please at least get your facts straight? AR-15 rifles are not used in combat zones, M-16 select fire rifles are. M-16 select fire rifles are actual "Assault Rifles". To my knowledge, there is no such thing as a 30 round drum for an AR type rifle either. My 10 year old sister is most likely far better at handling my AR-15 than you will ever be, buddy. Just like everyone who has any sense has said, it ain't the gun that the problem, it's the criminal carrying it...

[Thorpe]

lolz Seriously? Are you a assault rifle owner or something? tad sensitive. Listen buddy its my business along with everyone and anyone when assault rifle owners leave their 30 round drum magazines and AR-15s, weapons used in combat zones, for their kids to pick up. Dont change the meaning either that ticks me off, its a assault rifle, automatic, semi doesn't make a dam difference. Its all pretty straight forward, its the same reason "we the people" not the government, have chosen not to allow many various things in our society. Can you own a surface to air missile? Are Cyanide bullets part of the 2nd amendment too? Hey how about a Sherman tank? No? Come on Im just using it to protect my family....

Then make it your business to do something about the stupid people... I would fully support you... But leave the responsible people alone... It is a shame to see how bad the media has brainwashed you... I love the key media phrases you throw around, "assault rifle" "combat weapon" "30 round drum magazine" Do yourself a favor and do some research into these terms and see if the media is filling you with accurate information, or feeding you a line of crap...

[TecateDan]

Guns are not a necessity until someone is in your house about to kill your family and the police station is an hour away. Or how about the LA riots? I would argue that they were a necessity for people who lived there. How about after Katrina when there was no law? How about when your out in Montana when there is no one with in 6 hours of you? Car are a Necessity? Cars have been around since what the 1880's Guns have been around for a lot longer than cars so I would argue that guns are more a necessity than cars. Cars are a Luxury item. I mean we could all ride 3 wheelers if they would make them street legal.


You guys really lose me when you start comparing guns to cars and motorcycles. Does that really make sence to you? This is part of what makes "gun nuts" look, ummmmm............ dumb. Some people say "why do you own a 500 three wheeler" and I agree, just like an assault rifle it is dangerous in the wrong hands and a bit excessive. However I can't pick up my three wheeler and shoot a crowd of innocent people with it. (Ok, it does shoot non-lethal sand) So I do understand the rediculous hobbies us guys have. But the worn out chant of "why don't we ban cars too" is moronic. Cars are a neccesity, guns are not. Pretty simple.

[HuffieVA]

lolz Seriously? Are you a assault rifle owner or something? tad sensitive. Listen buddy its my business along with everyone and anyone when assault rifle owners leave their 30 round drum magazines and AR-15s, weapons used in combat zones, for their kids to pick up. Dont change the meaning either that ticks me off, its a assault rifle, automatic, semi doesn't make a dam difference. Its all pretty straight forward, its the same reason "we the people" not the government, have chosen not to allow many various things in our society. Can you own a surface to air missile? Are Cyanide bullets part of the 2nd amendment too? Hey how about a Sherman tank? No? Come on Im just using it to protect my family....

Would you kindly in all your infinite wisdom give me your definition of an assault rifle? The problem with this argument is that a great majority of people calling to have them banned dnn't honestly know what they are talking about, for example they would call this an assault weapon:
159730
and think that this weapon was acceptable:
159731
Never realizing that they are the same weapon in different suits...

What we need to do is make it easier for people with serious mental issues easier to be evaluated and committed if necessary...

How many of those six year olds do you think would be here today if the idiot who shot them would have been committed to an institution like his mother was trying to have done but was hitting numerous dead ends filled with bureaucratic red tape and ACLU inspired rules and guidelines? Answer: Each and every one of them... How many homicides take place every year at the hands of repeat offenders who were given light on non existent sentences the first two, three, four or five times through the revolving doors of justice? This terrible tragedy occurred because the system failed, it failed the shooters mother and it failed the teachers and the children that became victims because "Its just cruel to lock someone up when they are mentally ill" You want to keep crazy people from doing crazy trailprotrailprotrailprotrailpro? Get rid of the crazy people...

Another part of the solution is get rid of the "Insanity" defense, if you can try a 13 year old as an adult then you can charge an idiot as an adult. If someone steals, injures or kills someone they should be held accountable on the same scale as everyone else no matter what their I.Q. or mental capacity may be, Leniency for morons leads to those same morons repeating the same offenses over and over... Example: John Hinkley Jr. , this idiot shot the president of the United States because he thought that it was the path into Jodi Fosters pants and now 31 years later (after getting "help") he gets to visit his mother in Williamsburg, If I shot the president they would execute me... Why? because I'm not an Idiot... Stupidity should never be an acceptable defense, if someone has the inability to tell right from wrong (on the basics such as "your not supposed to kill people") they should be separated from mainstream society until they can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they understand the concept of the value of life...

Guns are very important to many people for many different reasons, and some people do have legitimate reasons to be against them but come on people its not weather or not a gun holds five or fifty rounds, its the person using it making the decision, they (people) are the ones to blame they are the ones we need to "Eliminate / Ban"

[belly]

Paperweight? the lib's definition of an assult rifle is based on looks. so you can't go hunting with a .308? or a 7.62x39mm? 7.62x54r? .223? or even a .22... all those are "assult" rifle rounds. oh wait, also "non-assult" rifle rounds. no difference. i see the ruger mini-14 isn't on the future ban list because it doesn't look "evil". that gun accepts 30 rd mags just like the ar/ak. why not ban glocks? you can get 30 rd mags for those. take all guns away and end up like austrailia.

[gage]

It's legal to own a Sherman tank..... Bad example then, how about landmines?


And yes it does make a "dam difference". The liberal mass media uses the term "assault rifle" incorrectly in order to scare people who don't know any better. Im not sure what to make of this. "liberal mass media":crazy: smh Sounds like ranting.


Also, if you're going to attack us sporting rifle owners, could you please at least get your facts straight? AR-15 rifles are not used in combat zones, M-16 select fire rifles are. M-16 select fire rifles are actual "Assault Rifles". To my knowledge, there is no such thing as a 30 round drum for an AR type rifle either. My 10 year old sister is most likely far better at handling my AR-15 than you will ever be, buddy. Just like everyone who has any sense has said, it ain't the gun that the problem, it's the criminal carrying it... Pardon me, Im not a weapon expert. 30 round clip my bad. Just because its not the same caliber and automatic doesn't matter, (any person can easy identify the weapons were referring too) low recoil, combat ready frame with every sort of attachment imaginable, its the fact that any person nearly any age can pick one up and with practically no training at all be about as armed as a member of SWAT. Im not oblivious of the fact that there are bad people out there. But something that has little to no use in society, (best reasons being shooting rats and doomsday "what if scenarios"), and is marketed like candy to people by billion dollar corporations, which then enables these screwed up people. At least Methamphetamine (something that's controlled now, or at least harder to get) actually served a legitimate purpose before it was banned/controlled whatever. You following me?:wondering
Then make it your business to do something about the stupid people... I would fully support you... But leave the responsible people alone... It is a shame to see how bad the media has brainwashed you... I love the key media phrases you throw around, "assault rifle" "combat weapon" "30 round drum magazine" Do yourself a favor and do some research into these terms and see if the media is filling you with accurate information, or feeding you a line of crap... Alright well, I guess I have a different view on reality than you and most people do here. One of us has been brainwashed by Piersmorgan and the Liberal media the other by Rush Limbaugh and the conservative media.:lol: That being said Im sure we can both agree one of us knows more than the other.;) Theres not much point to this argument any way, things WILL NOT CHANGE. The "liberal media" will lose interest in a month on sensible gun control, any bill will just get bogged down in congress, all the mean while good ole ma and pa NRA is only growing larger and will continue to act as the funnel and puppet that they are to billion dollar gun corporations. Cops will get shot in the streets and women and children will get slaughtered. We'll arm our teachers with glocks and give our kids flak jackets, every person will walk around armed to the teeth all in the name of personal security. O ya did I mention AR-15s sales are on the rise.:D

[El Camexican]

I love it! Great explanations guys; calling a semi-auto .308 an assault rifle because someone shortened the barrel, changed the stock from wood to plastic and painted it black is like putting chrome rims and fat tires on a 74 Firebird and calling it a race car. Canada and Australia got rid of their gun registration laws for some very simple reasons, the main ones being that they didn’t prevent any deaths or crimes and it cost a fortune to administrate. Home invasions jumped and in Canada some people who had guns stolen during the home invasions were charged with the crimes that were committed with them by the thieves!!! I found out I was ineligible to own a gun in 1997 because I’d moved less than two years before applying for my FAC permit and that was all it took to be denied. Now that is on my record and at a glance it looks like I have “issues” when all I did was chance addresses. So under the old law I was a criminal for having a gun in the house and so were thousands of others that did nothing wrong expect have guns in their homes which were legally purchased years ago. I warn all my American friends that if you give up just on small freedom when it comes to this issue you are opening Pandora’s box and you will have a heck of a time getting the lid back on.

[fabiodriven]

Pardon me, Im not a weapon expert.

Nor am I, but a lot of these people are. I suggest listening to what a lot of them have to say and educating yourself. The first problem I have when encountering somebody who is against guns is ignorance. I get it a lot from women, but men as well. The common bond they all have- They know nothing of what they're against. If people are going to be so whole-heartedly against something, they should at least educate themselves in the matter in order to give the ground they stand on merit.


We'll arm our teachers with glocks and give our kids flak jackets, every person will walk around armed to the teeth all in the name of personal security.

I'm all for teachers being armed. People would never even have to know. There are people carrying weapons every day and other people are none the wiser. I used to have a .25 Beretta that went with me everywhere I went. You could put it in your front pocket regardless of what kind of pants you were wearing and nobody would ever even know it was there. A lot of people question the "stopping power" of small caliber weapons and say something like that is "too small to do any good". OK, if it's so harmless, come at me and let's see if you stop when I shoot you. Something like that in a teacher's pocket could have changed that day drastically.

Also, nobody here is saying everyone should be armed to the teeth. We just want to keep our current rights intact. People like you want to change what we already have, you want to take from us. We're not asking for more, we just want to keep what's ours. Statements like the above you've made insinuate that we're trying to push guns into everyone's hands regardless of whether or not you want them, which is completely untrue. None of us here give a flying feck whether or not you have guns. We're not pushing you to do anything you don't want to at all. On the contrary actually. It is you who is pushing us. We're merely standing our ground.

You need to make some better points Gage. You, just like every other anti I've encountered, have no argument in these cases. If you're going to continue to answer to this thread, you've gotta come back with some better firepower (get it? :lol:). I am compelled to counter you, but you need to make a point for me to counter instead of just regurgitating so much of the propaganda you've swallowed.

[Mosh]

One thing all these anti-gun people always seem to forget, is they have the freedom to wake up in the morning, get on a forum and tell protective gun owners they are "unrealistic", go to work and carry on other daily activities, that make them happy, without having to worry about being forced to dig a mass grave for their friends and family members..Why is that?

Because we, have had the BIGGEST dang guns on the planet, and people that knew how to use them..And don't forget it. Do you think the USA would still be free if we had to use Colt 45's, and muzzle loaders, while all the other enemies were carrying bigger sticks?

Anyone who wants to lobby to take that away, may as well just go lay down on some railroad tracks and wait for the freight train, or sit back and shut-up, and be thankful, that enough Americans will be around to protect those who are living in fear..Or you can sit back and wait for the powers that be, to hopefully "bail you out". Recent history has shown, that we can't count on that.:rolleyes:

[gage]

Nor am I, but a lot of these people are. I suggest listening to what a lot of them have to say and educating yourself. The first problem I have when encountering somebody who is against guns is ignorance. I get it a lot from women, but men as well. The common bond they all have- They know nothing of what they're against. If people are going to be so whole-heartedly against something, they should at least educate themselves in the matter in order to give the ground they stand on merit. I never said I was anti-gun. I own guns. Military style Assault rifles, No. 30 round clips, No. Landmines, No.




I'm all for teachers being armed. People would never even have to know. There are people carrying weapons every day and other people are none the wiser. :crazy: I dont even know where to start....

Also, nobody here is saying everyone should be armed to the teeth. We just want to keep our current rights intact. People like you want to change what we already have, you want to take from us. We're not asking for more, we just want to keep what's ours. Statements like the above you've made insinuate that we're trying to push guns into everyone's hands regardless of whether or not you want them, which is completely untrue. None of us here give a flying feck whether or not you have guns. We're not pushing you to do anything you don't want to at all. On the contrary actually. It is you who is pushing us. We're merely standing our ground.You need to make some better points Gage. You, just like every other anti I've encountered, have no argument in these cases. If you're going to continue to answer to this thread, you've gotta come back with some better firepower (get it? :lol:). I am compelled to counter you, but you need to make a point for me to counter instead of just regurgitating so much of the propaganda you've swallowed. Dude I'm not going to go around in circles, my arguments are flying over your head. Its amusing that I'm the one whos brained washed, when you think its in the Bill of Rights to own military style assault rifle, of which has the same value/purpose to society as car. "cars are dangerous too, so lets ban them" wtf. It's sad that you believe living in a society where you have walk a mall strapped like Arnold Schwarzenegger or have teachers keep a Beretta in their desk some how makes for a more free society. Never mind. Your right if our nation citizens had less guns that would mean the "government will have total control" first step step towards world domination:crazy:. And I need to make better points.:rolleyes: Your the one who needs to educate yourself start by reading some U.S. history (no not Chris Hannity/Glen Beck or Fox News specials, an actual textbook:idea:), and look into what the 2nd amendment really says instead of how its interpreted now (or since 2008). Its also funny how you guys push statistics that are pumped out by the NRA and gun corporations. Your right I should probably just stop before I become uncivil, because the argument is completely fictitious. Assault rifles make great paperweights and aren't going anywhere, along with this argument too.:lol: (haha get it??)

[El Camexican]

One thing all these anti-gun people always seem to forget, is they have the freedom to wake up in the morning, get on a forum and tell protective gun owners they are "unrealistic", go to work and carry on other daily activities, that make them happy, without having to worry about being forced to dig a mass grave for their friends and family members..Why is that?

Because we, have had the BIGGEST dang guns on the planet, and people that knew how to use them..And don't forget it. Do you think the USA would still be free if we had to use Colt 45's, and muzzle loaders, while all the other enemies were carrying bigger sticks?

Anyone who wants to lobby to take that away, may as well just go lay down on some railroad tracks and wait for the freight train, or sit back and shut-up, and be thankful, that enough Americans will be around to protect those who are living in fear..Or you can sit back and wait for the powers that be, to hopefully "bail you out". Recent history has shown, that we can't count on that.:rolleyes:


Well said Sir and in the words of Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto regarding Pearl Harbor - “You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass.” If anyone wants to know what would have happened to an unarmed America just read up on the Jananese invasion of China where millions of unarmed men women and chilneren were slaughtered like pigs in WWII.

Of the estimated 20 million people that died as a result of the Japanese hostilities during World War II, about half of them were in China. China claims that 35 million Chinese were killed or wounded during the Japanese occupation from 1931 to 1945. An estimated 2.7 million Chinese were killed in a Japanese "pacification" program that targeted "all males between 15 and 60 who were suspected to be enemies" along with other "enemies pretending to be local people." Out of the thousands of Chinese prisoners captured during the war only 56 were found alive in 1946.

Try defending against that kind of brutality with a sling-shot and a paper weight.

[Stonewall]

Bad example then, how about landmines?

How is having landmines even remotely related to having a sporting rifle such as an AR-15?


Pardon me, Im not a weapon expert. 30 round clip my bad. Just because its not the same caliber and automatic doesn't matter, (any person can easy identify the weapons were referring too) low recoil, combat ready frame with every sort of attachment imaginable, its the fact that any person nearly any age can pick one up and with practically no training at all be about as armed as a member of SWAT. Im not oblivious of the fact that there are bad people out there. But something that has little to no use in society, (best reasons being shooting rats and doomsday "what if scenarios"), and is marketed like candy to people by billion dollar corporations, which then enables these screwed up people. At least Methamphetamine (something that's controlled now, or at least harder to get) actually served a legitimate purpose before it was banned/controlled whatever. You following me?:wondering

Who gives a flip if a gun has low recoil? ANY semi-auto small caliber gun is going to have relatively low recoil. What difference does that make? My gun is "useless to society" because it LOOKS like a military rifle? And if I put a grip, a flashlight, and an electronic sight on my AR-15 that makes it "more dangerous"?

How exactly is it that ANY person at ANY age can get sporting rifles? If you're under 18 you CANNOT buy any form of firearm (save BB guns). If you have ever been convicted of a felony you CANNOT buy a gun...

Besides, there are plenty of legitimate purposes for an AR-15 or other sporting rifle:

Varmint and pest control.
Deer Hunting.
Coyote Hunting.
Hog Hunting.
Coon Hunting.
Self defense.
Target shooting.

So now your blaming the companies that make the guns for the crimes committed by criminals using them?? How does that work?

How can you use Meth as an argument? Meth turns people into the crazy people that are causing the problems!!

[Stonewall]

Dude I'm not going to go around in circles, my arguments are flying over your head. Its amusing that I'm the one whos brained washed, when you think its in the Bill of Rights to own military style assault rifle, of which has the same value/purpose to society as car. "cars are dangerous too, so lets ban them" wtf. It's sad that you believe living in a society where you have walk a mall strapped like Arnold Schwarzenegger or have teachers keep a Beretta in their desk some how makes for a more free society. Never mind. Your right if our nation citizens had less guns that would mean the "government will have total control" first step step towards world domination:crazy:. And I need to make better points.:rolleyes: Your the one who needs to educate yourself start by reading some U.S. history (no not Chris Hannity/Glen Beck or Fox News specials, an actual textbook:idea:), and look into what the 2nd amendment really says instead of how its interpreted now (or since 2008). Its also funny how you guys push statistics that are pumped out by the NRA and gun corporations. Your right I should probably just stop before I become uncivil, because the argument is completely fictitious. Assault rifles make great paperweights and aren't going anywhere, along with this argument too.:lol: (haha get it??)

Nobody said that a sporting rifle has the same "value to society" as a car. The comparison was to show that your argument was illogical, but that apparently just sailed right over your head. You are saying that we shouldn't have AR-15's etc. because they were used to kill some people. The same argument can be used towards cars, in order to show how ridiculous it is. Your argument is the same as me saying "We should ban cars, because in 2009, 33,800,000 people were killed in car crashes." (Source (http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s1103.pdf)) Were those crashes caused because cars are available to people and legal to buy?? Do you see how ridiculous your argument is now??

History textbooks... Would those be the same textbooks that say that Thomas Edison invented the incandescent light, when all he really did was make it work using trial and error instead of any scientific process? Or that Henry Ford invented the automobile, when all he really did was create a way to mass produce it?

From this source (http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html):

Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

I don't see anything that has anything to do with what kind of Arms we can or cannot have, do you?

[swampthang]

Good luck buying anykind of AR or AK type rifle,clips,ammo. Me and a few friends went to the local gun shop last night. More people in there then I ever seen. All the controversial weapons and accesories where sold out. My buddy called everyplace he could think of and there sold out as well. It will be months before anymore of these rifles get back in my area and if they do they will be sold aready before they hit the rack. Guys have already spoken for them. Prices on used rifles have now sky rocketed. Talk about supply and demand.

But I would like to take a second to thank Mr. Obama, he has found a way to stimulate the economy with gun sales.:lol:

[Howdy]

But I would like to take a second to thank Mr. Obama, he has found a way to stimulate the economy with gun sales.:lol:

At least it's a "Shot" in the right direction. LOL

[Scootertrash]

Long Post Warning


gage
there were no Bushmaster AR-15s, just muskets and muzzle loaders.


No sh!t Sherlock. It was 1775 and firearms were in their infancy. Do you think there weren't robbers thugs and thieves in 1775? Are you going to try to tell me that citizens in 1775 never had to protect themselves from evil men who meant them harm? Evil men who shouldn't have had firearms because they used them for committing crimes?


gage
And aside from the fact that most Americans owned one, they were used more like a fork and spoon than what "most" people use them for today.
Wrong again. Most people today use ALL of their firearms for the exact same purposes. Hunting, self protection (where the government allows it :rolleyes:) and target practice. .223/5.56 (AR15 ammunition) and 7.62X39 (AK ammunition) are legal for deer hunting in many states. For anyone to claim that those rounds are not suitable for hunting is ignorant of the facts. For anyone to claim that those rounds aren't suitable for Elk or other large game of the sort is, well ummm DUUH!! While it would be possible to kill larger game with these rounds, it's not common sense.

For anyone to say you don't need high capacity 30 round magazines (yea proper terminology is magazine NOT clip) for hunting, I've got news for ya:
Most states have limitation on the amount shells you can have in a gun for big game/fur bearer hunting. I do not know of ANY STATE that allows 30 round magazines for hunting except for possibly varmint hunting.

Summation: You already CAN'T use 30 round magazines for hunting, therefore it's a baseless, lame argument


gage
Listen buddy its my business along with everyone and anyone when assault rifle owners leave their 30 round drum magazines and AR-15s, weapons used in combat zones, for their kids to pick up.

WTH is a 30 round drum magazine? No such thing. Once again throwing out crap you obviously know nothing about.

Painting with a rather broad brush aren't we? The majority of gun owners DO NOT leave weapons and ammunition where children can "pick them up". You make it sound like people have guns scattered about their homes like toys. Don't be an ass.

From just facts.com. Studies and sources for the information are listed within the article.

http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp

Households With a Gun Adults Owning a Gun Adults Owning a Handgun
Percentage 40-45% 30-34% 17-19%
Number 47-53 million 70-80 million 40-45 million

From the CDC (Center for Disease Control):
http://webappa.cdc.gov/cgi-bin/broker.exe?_service=v8prod&_server=app-v-ehip-wisq.cdc.gov&_port=5081&_sessionid=HW/1usJuM52&_program=wisqars.details10.sas&_service=&type=U&prtfmt=STANDARD&age1=5&age2=18&agegp=5-18&deaths=67952&_debug=0&lcdfmt=custom&ethnicty=0&ranking=10&deathtle=Death

Accidental firearms deaths among children from firearms is number 7 after Motor Vehicles (#1) Drowning (#2), Poisoning (#3), Fire or Burns (#4), Other land transport (atv's included?) (#5), and Suffocation (#6)

Accidental firearms deaths totaled 1,174 from 1999-2007 or an average of 146.75 deaths a year (1,174 divided by 8)
Approx. 75 million adult gun owners in the US (see above) and 147 accidental child deaths is equates to .000002 % of adult gun owners caused an accidental child death each year.

Another lame argument puffed up by the media, liberals and, apparently, self proclaimed gun owners (gage)who don't know the facts, or fail to do their own research.

The self defense argument:
More from the above justfact.com website
http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp

* A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 0.5% of households had members who had used a gun for defense during a situation in which they thought someone "almost certainly would have been killed" if they "had not used a gun for protection." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 162,000 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard."[12]

* Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18]

* A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 3.5% of households had members who had used a gun "for self-protection or for the protection of property at home, work, or elsewhere." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 1,029,615 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard."[19]

* A 1994 survey conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that Americans use guns to frighten away intruders who are breaking into their homes about 498,000 times per year.[20]

* A 1982 survey of male felons in 11 state prisons dispersed across the U.S. found:[21]

• 34% had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"

• 40% had decided not to commit a crime because they "knew or believed that the victim was carrying a gun"

• 69% personally knew other criminals who had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"[22]

Still want to try to convince me that being armed doesn't prevent crime?

How many children's lives would have been saved if the principal or the school psychologist, the first 2 adults to confront the murderer, would've had a weapon? Nobody can say for sure, but I'm willing to bet that less that 26 would have died.

gage
automatic, semi doesn't make a dam difference

Bullsh!t. There is a huge difference between squeezing the trigger and being able to "spray" as many bullets as you want, and having to squeeze the trigger for each shot.


gage
Can you own a surface to air missile? Are Cyanide bullets part of the 2nd amendment too? How about landmines?
Seriously dude? Talk about ridiculous arguments. Once again, don't be an ass


gage
Pardon me, Im not a weapon expert.

Tell us something we don't know Captain Obvious. Anyone here with more experience in firearms than you doesn't need for you to point that out. But yet here you are, spewing out inaccuracies, untruths and just plain stupid, uninformed comments about guns.


gage
One of us has been brainwashed by Piersmorgan and the Liberal media the other by Rush Limbaugh and the conservative media.
Piers Morgan is a liberal, Limey D-bag who is still pissed that we kicked his Brit ancestors out of our country over 200 years ago, and his opinion doesn't mean sh!t as far as I'm concerned. He is not a citizen of the US and he has no business trying to tell OUR government what we need to do to correct any problems our country has. Great Britain confiscated the majority of guns from their citizens and they still have gun violence.

There is a graph here related to Great Britain gun violence:

http://www.justfacts.com/images/guncontrol/england-full.png

Do you know one of the reasons that the Revolutionary war started? The British government tried to take the colonists guns. I got this from the website Social Studies for kids, so it shold be easy for you to understand:

http://www.socialstudiesforkids.com/wwww/us/lexingtonconcorddef.htm

What is this "conservative media" you talk about? You do realize that Fox news has a large number of Democrat Party supporters employed as members of their news shows and support staff, right?

They also broadcast some very Liberal view points related to various topics, including gun control, but you knew that, right?


Lexington and Concord

Definition: First shots fired between American and British troops, on April 19, 1775. The British chose to march to Concord because it was an arms depot. This meant that the Americans had stockpiled weapons there. British troops had occupied Boston and were marching on Concord as they passed through Lexington. No one is still sure who fired first, but it was the "Shot Heard 'Round the World."


gage
Cops will get shot in the streets and women and children will get slaughtered. We'll arm our teachers with glocks and give our kids flak jackets, every person will walk around armed to the teeth all in the name of personal security.
:rolleyes:
You can't be serious? This is the same lame lefty, Liberal blather they trot out when conceal carry gets passed somewhere, and it hasn't happened yet. And you try to say the pro gunners "what ifs" are ridiculous? Pot calling the kettle black. Most of the Conservatives/Independents/ Libertarians I know don't listen to any talk radio. Unlike the left we are able to think for ourselves and don't rely on the government or others to know that we alone are responsible for our own self defense


gage
O ya did I mention AR-15s sales are on the rise.
:beer
Yup, they are. AR15 rifles, parts and magazines are out of stock everywhere. Pumping millions of dollars into the economy and keeping people working. I think it's awesome! If any of the members here need any help finding any AR15 parts accessories and ammo let me know, I'll do what I can to help! No Charge!

All of your arguments lose credibility when your comments include crap like "Fox News", "Rush Limbaugh", Chris Hannity (Especially when his name is Sean ;)) Because they are the same old Democrat/Liberal statements you lefties resort to when you are losing an argument. When you can't come up with facts, you start making accusations.

So gage, before you tell others they need to learn a little history maybe you should do your own research first.

[gage]

No sh!t Sherlock. It was 1775 and firearms were in their infancy. Do you think there weren't robbers thugs and thieves in 1775? Are you going to try to tell me that citizens in 1775 never had to protect themselves from evil men who meant them harm? Evil men who shouldn't have had firearms because they used them for committing crimes? Man I was compelled to to leave this thread alone, but wow I've honestly never read so much blind ignorance in all my life. How can you honestly say that we use guns in the same manner/purpose as in 1775. I don't have all day to educate you.


Wrong again. Most people today use ALL of their firearms for the exact same purposes. Hunting, self protection (where the government allows it :rolleyes:) and target practice. .223/5.56 (AR15 ammunition) and 7.62X39 (AK ammunition) are legal for deer hunting in many states. For anyone to claim that those rounds are not suitable for hunting is ignorant of the facts. For anyone to claim that those rounds aren't suitable for Elk or other large game of the sort is, well ummm DUUH!! While it would be possible to kill larger game with these rounds, it's not common sense. You got to be kidding me lol.... When did I say you use them for hunting, I know people dont go hunting with 30 round clips, yet for some reason they EXIST:idea:!!! The kid in Connecticut had them. MAGIZNES-CLIP-DRUM, whatever!!!!! Lol dude honestly can you even think straight??? You just shot yourself in the foot and you dont even realize it.


For anyone to say you don't need high capacity 30 round magazines (yea proper terminology is magazine NOT clip) for hunting, I've got news for ya:Most states have limitation on the amount shells you can have in a gun for big game/fur bearer hunting. I do not know of ANY STATE that allows 30 round magazines for hunting except for possibly varmint hunting.
Summation: You already CAN'T use 30 round magazines for hunting, therefore it's a baseless, lame argumentLolz wtf are you high??? Same thing, WHY DO THEY MAKE AND SELLL THEM THEN!!!:idea:



Painting with a rather broad brush aren't we? The majority of gun owners DO NOT leave weapons and ammunition where children can "pick them up". You make it sound like people have guns scattered about their homes like toys. Don't be an ass. Umm obviously they do. Do you know how many retarded people there are in this country?

Still want to try to convince me that being armed doesn't prevent crime? Nope, Im obliviously not going to convince you of anything. And I dont care about your pumped up NRA stats. Unless you want to read my Piersmorgan stats?:p

Still want to tryHow many children's lives would have been saved if the principal or the school psychologist, the first 2 adults to confront the murderer, would've had a weapon? Nobody can say for sure, but I'm willing to bet that less that 26 would have died. what if, what if, what if. Hey what if the kid didnt have a Bushmaster AR-15 Assault rifle with 30 round magazines huh? Following me yet??? No? Probably not. Your missing half the argument in your statements already.:(


Bullsh!t. There is a huge difference between squeezing the trigger and being able to "spray" as many bullets as you want, and having to squeeze the trigger for each shot. wtf are you talking about.:confused:



Seriously dude? Talk about ridiculous arguments. Once again, don't be an ass Rube:rolleyes:




Tell us something we don't know Captain Obvious. Anyone here with more experience in firearms than you doesn't need for you to point that out. But yet here you are, spewing out inaccuracies, untruths and just plain stupid, uninformed comments about guns. Okay buddy :wondering:wondering
Piers Morgan is a liberal, Limey D-bag who is still pissed that we kicked his Brit ancestors out of our country over 200 years ago, and his opinion doesn't mean sh!t as far as I'm concerned. He is not a citizen of the US and he has no business trying to tell OUR government what we need to do to correct any problems our country has. Great Britain confiscated the majority of guns from their citizens and they still have gun violence.:confused:


There is a graph here related to Great Britain gun violence: No


What is this "conservative media" you talk about? You do realize that Fox news has a large number of Democrat Party supporters employed as members of their news shows and support staff, right? So theres a "liberal media" but not a "conservative media" :wondering Okay!:lol:

They also broadcast some very Liberal view points related to various topics, including gun control, but you knew that, right? Good keep watching it then!





:rolleyes:
You can't be serious? This is the same lame lefty, Liberal blather they trot out when conceal carry gets passed somewhere, and it hasn't happened yet. And you try to say the pro gunners "what ifs" are ridiculous? Pot calling the kettle black. Most of the Conservatives/Independents/ Libertarians I know don't listen to any talk radio. Unlike the left we are able to think for ourselves:Dsure you do!



All of your arguments lose credibility when your comments include crap like "Fox News", "Rush Limbaugh", Chris Hannity (Especially when his name is Sean ;)) Because they are the same old Democrat/Liberal statements you lefties resort to when you are losing an argument. When you can't come up with facts, you start making accusations.: What accusations did I make? what the ones like asking why we have military style assault rifles, 30 round clips,magizens,drums whatever theyre called in a civilized society? How much more of a purpose do they serve now than owning a landmine or a tank? Sorry that its not a question you and most people here agree with or even want to hear. Im pretty sure my behavior was civil up until I read your comments though.


So gage, before you tell others they need to learn a little history maybe you should do your own research first. Dude at least my comments make sense.

[dcreel]

Just so it has been said, Scootertrash I agree with everything you posted 100%. Judging by the likes and thanks it isn't you whose comments aren't making sense.

[Thorpe]

Umm obviously they do. Do you know how many retarded people there are in this country?


I can name a specific one in this thread... Does that count???

I am with 110% with Dcreel and Scooter here....

[Stonewall]

Wow gage, you are an absolute moron....

Noone here knows exactly how guns were used in 1775, None of us were there!! We do know that they were used to win our freedom, and the people who wrote the Constitution gave us the right to own them.

I use my 30 round mags for hunting, and for just shooting for fun.

None of Scooter's stats came from the NRA.

So just because ONE head case managed to get an AR-15 Sporting Rifle, you automatically assume that people just leave them laying everywhere and hand them out like Jehova's Witness flyers? Do you even have the capacity to think logically?

Just exactly how civilized do you think our society is? Are you so blind that you can't see the statistics of how many crimes are committed here on a daily basis? How can you compare owning a tank or landmines to owning a rifle?? A tank is complete overkill for any purpose other than war. Landmines are too random for self defense. But an AR-15 is an excellent gun for self defense.

I find it very amusing that you realize your losing this argument, so you resort to outrageous accusations, dumb comments, and complete stupidity... Come back when you have something intelligent to say, preferably backed by some facts.

[HuffieVA]

Gage,

I feel obligated to offer you what I consider a last ditch effort to drive a reasonable thought into that apparent thick skull of yours....

First and foremost this is supposed to be a free country, those of us that follow the rules are supposed to have Life, liberty, freedom of speech etc, included in the same document that presents us with those rights as citizens is what is commonly referred to as the 2'nd Amendment, why is it second on the list? Because my son it must have been pretty god damn important to the founders of this great country that compiled that list, the first ten amendments were not actually "amended" they were part of the bill of rights and were fused with the Constitution of the United States of America almost immediately upon its acceptance, so it was not an afterthought it was a basic principal of the founding of this country.

A few posts above, "Scootertrash" offer you factual data to back up his claims, yet you become fixated on points that have little to no bearing on the actual effects of gun control. Your fixated on the idea of a 30 shot clip/magazine/drum or whatever you wish to call it but you seem to miss the entire point that regardless of the number of rounds per magazine that there was not one person in the elementary school with the tools (namely another firearm) to stop the shooter... therefor it would have made absolutely no difference in this particular case if the shooter had a 5/10/20/50/100 round magazine, it takes mere seconds to change clips whether its on what you would consider a deer rifle or what you would consider an assault rifle. There was nobody available to stop him, he finally heard the police arriving and he cowardly took his own life. That without a doubt means that upon realizing he would be met with equal firepower he didnt even have the balls to give it the old college try, and he didnt even have to see the guns the police were carrying, he only had to hear the sirens and imagine what might actually happen to him. Just imagine if he had considered that he would have been met with an armed security guard at the school? Perhaps the same outcome? Instead he was well aware of the highly advertized fact that it was a "gun free zone" And the outcome was disastrous for the entire nation.

Rarely is a mass shooter mentally stable, the fact that this particular shooters mother was relentlessly trying to have him committed should say something in itself, the state said "He's not the problem..." but now the "extreme left" says that the gun itself was the problem. Personally I don't care for AR's but I have nothing against them and I have alot of friends that do have them, myself I'm more of a handgun guy, I like the challenge of accurately shooting a handgun, it doesn't mean I don't like long guns, I have my grandfathers hunting rifles and a few others and a couple of shotguns, I wouldn't consider myself a collector (or gun nut as you may prefer to say) but I think I have the right to have the exact same weapons that criminals have the ability to get. I don't need a full automatic because they are very expensive and are for all intensive purposes in the hand of serious collectors, law enforcement and of course the military (and have been since around 1933)

The problem is we have a revolving door of justice in this country, I'll give you a great example.... last year on March 30'th my garage was broken into, and four bikes were stolen, I finally ended up finding someone connected to (lets call it) "press" for information, turns out the main guy was pulled over just after dropping the bikes off at his cousins house, he was nailed for a second offense of possession of a fire arm by a felon (if you can do basic math that means he was armed when he broke into my garage) luckily for him (or quite possibly me) it was the night of my birthday and I was sleeping a bit heavy... Anyway I have a full confession on tape, of course it wasn't "legally obtained" so they cannot use it in court, the detective has no doubt of the five individuals involved, in fact they all have warrants out for them for several other bike thefts, oh and of course for failure to appear after they were let out on bail and they continue to steel bikes (allegedly at least) with the same style, even actually shooting at at least two homeowners but "beating a confession out of someone only counts on TV", just like gun control will....

Let me just say that if they come back here that at a minimum one of us is going to court... Because protecting my family overrides your warped belief that gun control is the answer... because in a situation where its one against five you may actually need a few extra shots...

[Scootertrash]

Man I was compelled to to leave this thread alone, but wow I've honestly never read so much blind ignorance in all my life. How can you honestly say that we use guns in the same manner/purpose as in 1775. I don't have all day to educate you.

You shouldn't need all day with the vast amount of knowledge you seem to think you have. It should only take a sentence or two for you to explain it to myself and the rest of us, a paragraph at the most. I've got plenty of time to come back and read it so take your time thinking up your reply. I wouldn't want you to hurt yourself. ;)

You got to be kidding me lol.... When did I say you use them for hunting, I know people dont go hunting with 30 round clips, yet for some reason they EXIST:idea:!!! The kid in Connecticut had them. MAGIZNES-CLIP-DRUM, whatever!!!!! Lol dude honestly can you even think straight??? You just shot yourself in the foot and you dont even realize it.

Wow. You can't even keep your replies in the correct order. There is nothing about hunting in the comment of mine you quoted. Are YOU high? Another thing: Spell check. Ever heard of it?
I never said you said people use them for hunting, unless your name is "For anyone". It's another one of the baseless idiotic arguments that your lib buddies spout when arguing against 30 round magazines. "You shouldn't need 30 bullets for hunting"

Lolz wtf are you high??? Same thing, WHY DO THEY MAKE AND SELLL THEM THEN!!!:idea:

Well, since this is a free country, companies can manufacture these items and sell them. Gun owners can buy them because it's a free country. Once again, the majority of gun owners are responsible and don't misuse them or the rifles they fit. Criminals and psychopaths commit crimes that kill. Punish them not law abiding gun owners


Umm obviously they do. Do you know how many retarded people there are in this country?

Not an exact number, but obviously I'm dealing with one in this thread. ;)

Nope, Im obliviously not going to convince you of anything. And I dont care about your pumped up NRA stats. Unless you want to read my Piersmorgan stats?:p

They aren't pumped up NRA stats. If you had taken the time to go check out the website you would have found that the stats come from multiple sources including our Government and the Centers for Disease control, and are compared to and verified with other various surveys and organizations statistics on the same issues. But then again you really aren't interested in the truth are you? The truth proves that your arguments do not hold up against the facts.

Sure go ahead and post up your Piers Moron stats. I'd love to shoot them down too.
FWIW He seems to be a real winner :rolleyes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piers_Morgan

what if, what if, what if. Hey what if the kid didnt have a Bushmaster AR-15 Assault rifle with 30 round magazines huh? Following me yet??? No? Probably not. Your missing half the argument in your statements already.:(

Oh yea, I'm following and I'm missing nothing. The kid could not and did not purchase the firearm(s) himself. He shot his mother in the head 4 times, at least once in the face, then stole her firearms. Maybe we should make murder and theft illegal. Oh, wait.........

wtf are you talking about.:confused:
I know you are confused. You obviously no little to nothing about guns. I quoted your statement:

gage
automatic, semi doesn't make a dam difference

Yes, it does make a difference. Full automatic weapons fire more than one cartridge with one pull of the trigger (hence the ability to "spray" bullets everywhere), semiautomatic weapons fire only one cartridge for each pull of the trigger. Huge difference

I'll borrow this from you (I added the apostrophe for you.):

You just shot yourself in the foot and you don't even realize it.


Rube:rolleyes:
Ruuuuubbbeeeeeeeee, don't take your love to town.


Okay buddy :wondering:wondering


:confused:


No


So theres a "liberal media" but not a "conservative media" :wondering Okay!:lol:
Fox is not a conservative News Show. I've heard balanced reporting from both sides from them. Obviously not far enough left for you tho, and to be fair, not far enough right for some.
The majority of Conservative media is on the radio, and it has no where near the exposure of all of your favorite Socialist news outlets like MSNBC (My Socialist News Broadcasting Company), CNN (Communist News Network), CBS (Communist Broadcasting Service), NBC (Nothings Better than Communinsm), and ABC (All Bow to Commies)



Good keep watching it then!

I watch very little TV. When I do it's Sons, Discovery or The History Channel.




:Dsure you do!
(First, the grammatically proper response to "Unlike Liberals, Conservatives are able to think for themselves" would be "sure you are" not "sure you do". Kids today. You buy them books and send them to school. Tax dollars well spent.)

I do. That's' why I was able to take the time to dig up some unbiased facts for you, but you never even checked them out and still fall back on your same tired DU based fallacies and don't post any of your own facts to back up your statements.


: What accusations did I make? what the ones like asking why we have military style assault rifles, 30 round clips,magizens,drums whatever theyre called in a civilized society? How much more of a purpose do they serve now than owning a landmine or a tank? Sorry that its not a question you and most people here agree with or even want to hear. Im pretty sure my behavior was civil up until I read your comments though.

You accused me of being brain washed by Fox news and Rush Limbaugh and Fred Hannity or whomever you called him. (again his name is Sean)

Dude at least my comments make sense.
Ummm, No, they don't. Maybe to your DU buddies, but to the majority here, not.

Just an FYI as far as guns you may own:
Airsoft are not considered "real" guns, and COD does not qualify as an education on military style weapons.

[TimSr]

I have yet to hear of an alleged "assault weapon" being used in the CT murders. I did hear a Bushmaster rifle was found in a car. CT has had an assault weapons ban since the first federal ban. None of the guns used were illegal under CT's assault weapons ban. They were all legally purchased and owned in full compliance with CT's assault weapons ban by the killers mother before he murdered her and stole them. Its sad to say, but an adult male in the doorway of a class of 7 year olds could have achieved the same outcome whether he needed to change smaller clips, reload a revolver, or your single shot shotgun, or a baseball bat. They were defenseless.

[Scootertrash]

Tim, The last report I heard was that he did use the Bushmaster in the murders. Personally, I think we'll know once the investigation is complete.

The media got a lot of stuff wrong in their feeding frenzy when they first started reporting this:

1. The killers mother worked at Sandy Hook Elementary School She did not work there.
2. First report is that it was the killers brother His brother lives in New Jersey
3. The killer had also killed his father His father lives out of state and was not killed
4. The killer tried to buy a gun the day before the attack There is no evidence to prove this (yet)
5 The killer was involved in an altercation at the school the day before the killings Not true


So much for factual reporting. Get it out first and correct the mistakes later??

[gage]

Its like 9v1 :D:D. Ill just sum up my point of view k? Assault rifles, read the criteria, pretty simple(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban) have no real purpose in society for a civilian. Sure I know you think I'm wrong fine. What are they used for? Peace of mind, right? Why cant you use one of the thousands of other perfectly legitimate weapons for that same purpose? Please Im tired of reading stories, doomsday scenarios, invasions and whatever other what ifs. I compared them to landmines or a tank because they ARE OVERKILL. Some of these assault rifles/weapons (whatever is technically right), with ACOG scopes, extended magazines are completely ridiculous to have. I realize that most people are safe with them, but in my view when taking into account what they're legitimately used for, make them just as useful to own as a landmine and in the wrong hands clearly devastating. To be honest if you have several of these guns, YOU need to question your sanity and logic. Sorry if thats harsh. Look at the amount of these weapons that are here now in this country, how would a ban on them be bad? You could still own one, and probably buy and sell one online and at a show. It would just drive up the price, is that a bad thing? Who is it hurting? The people who make them? Give me a break. Im not preaching a ban would slash crime ten fold and make mass shootings a thing of the past. But just making more and more and more and more isnt going to help further better society. IMHO
And if your are already ready to shoot my stats down whats the point of posting them? Youve already walled yourself off from the truth and dug your trench. Besides "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics." Mark Twain:p But seriously, calling me an ass, thick skulled, slow just because I have a view contrary to yours is lame. And I would bet my whole argument that 90% of you here couldnt tell me what your 3rd Amedment was without looking it up. :cry:This is the real second amendmenthttp://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/real-rationale-2nd-amendment-right-wingers-are-totally-ignorant-about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution"For 100 years, the Supreme Court said that the second part of the text had nothing to do with individuals' rights to bear arms. But four years ago, the Supreme Court, in a case called “Heller,” said the Second Amendment does mean that individuals have the right to a handgun at home." I know its just liberal scare tactics and hallucinations. :crazy::D O no wait its history.... :eek::idea::idea:;);)

[dcreel]

http://youtu.be/XMg0FQS6Fqo

Not only did he save his and his sister's lives, he may have ended the home invasions for the whole neighborhood.

Now what was your argument again??

Just think.. You and the Burglar that got shot both have something in common.. You're both for Gun Control..

[HuffieVA]

Gage,

I called you thick skulled because you, in response to historical statistics accuse them of being rigged because they do not support your stance or beliefs. You have every right to believe what you wish, but when you simply discount factual historical information and offer nothing to back it up.

You preach "overkill" by using tanks and landmines and discount comparisons to the greater number of injuries and deaths caused by vehicles... heres an example, basically you state that a gun having a capacity greater than ten rounds is ridiculous overkill and simply asking for trouble, do you feel the same way about Yamaha R1's ? after all they look a little funny, and will slight modifications can easily obtain speeds three times the speed limit.... is that overkill too? Will you counter that by saying its the owners responsibility to restrain him/her self and obey the laws of the land? Why does that not apply to firearms? You do realize that your not really allowed to murder someone with a musket right? In fact a shot to the head with a musket would likely cause more visual damage than a modern "Assault Rifle"... Look I understand you are against the so called "Assault Rifles" but if your going to go up against a group of individuals who (from the various posts) tend to disagree with you, you may want to either come up with some factual information to support your claims or simply admit that you simply don't like them because they tend to look scary and you personally see no legitimate use for them, but keep in mind some people do see legitimate uses for them, and yes just like some people should never own a hammer, some people should never own a gun, what we should be doing is keeping all guns out of the hands of criminals, and locking up the criminals that use them in crime instead of slapping their hands and letting them go to repeat their crimes then in turn making it even easier for them by banning guns...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller

Read the whole text of the decision.... "...determined that handguns are "arms" for the purposes of the Second Amendment (along with rifles and shotguns)..."

[Howdy]

.......................

[Scootertrash]

Its like 9v1 :D:D. Ill just sum up my point of view k? Assault rifles, read the criteria, pretty simple(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban) have no real purpose in society for a civilian.
Seriously? You want to use the Democrat/Liberal Weapons ban version for the definition of "Assault Rifle"? And you falsely accuse me of using "trumped up NRA stats"? Please.

The AWB banned firearms that looked like or had some characteristics of so called assault weapons. How does what a gun looks like make it more deadly?

Sure I know you think I'm wrong fine. What are they used for? Peace of mind, right?

It's been posted multiple time what gun owners use them for. Hunting, target practice, and yes, self defense.

Why cant you use one of the thousands of other perfectly legitimate weapons for that same purpose?

Gun owners do. Why do you feel the need to tell people what's legitimate (in your mind) and what's not?

Please Im tired of reading stories, doomsday scenarios, invasions and whatever other what ifs.

You mean just like your "what ifs"?

I compared them to landmines or a tank because they ARE OVERKILL.

Only because you are scared of them because of lies and fabrications of the left and the media.

Some of these assault rifles/weapons (whatever is technically right), with ACOG scopes, extended magazines are completely ridiculous to have. I realize that most people are safe with them, but in my view when taking into account what they're legitimately used for, make them just as useful to own as a landmine and in the wrong hands clearly devastating.

Once again, your opinion based on emotion, misinformation, falsehood and lies. They are used legitimately for hunting and target practice every day by millions of gun owners.
Name me one weapon that isn't devastating in the wrong hands. I can wait........

In addition, name me one firearm or firearm design available to day that wasn't used somehow in a military application at some point in the history of the US. I'll wait for that too......

To be honest if you have several of these guns, YOU need to question your sanity and logic. Sorry if thats harsh.

It's not harsh, it's stupid. You have no right to question what someone legally owns whether you like it or not, Build a bridge and get over it.

Look at the amount of these weapons that are here now in this country, how would a ban on them be bad? You could still own one, and probably buy and sell one online and at a show.

You really don't understand how these things work do you? You really think that if they pass a ban it will end at "well, you can have the ones you've got, they just can't make any more. Right. All I can say to you is "Baaaaaaaaaa"

It would just drive up the price, is that a bad thing? Who is it hurting? The people who make them?

Then what's the point of creating more laws to try to control them?

Give me a break.
No

Im not preaching a ban would slash crime ten fold and make mass shootings a thing of the past.

It sure sounds like it. If you're not, then what is the point of controlling them more than they already are or outright banning them? It's funny, you are shooting down (pun intended) all of your previous arguments, but you can't even see it.

But just making more and more and more and more isnt going to help further better society. IMHO

Stopping manufacture of any firearm is not going to better society either. Severely punishing criminals is the only thing that will improve society, but we don't want to hurt their feelings or violate their rights now do we?

And if your are already ready to shoot my stats down whats the point of posting them?

Still afraid of the facts aren't you?

Youve already walled yourself off from the truth and dug your trench.

No, you've walled yourself off from the truth. I posted unbiased stats and facts from multiple sources, but yet you refuse to look at them or acknowledge them.

Besides "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics." Mark Twain:p

So all of the crap that you posted is lies too then, right?

But seriously, calling me an ass, thick skulled, slow just because I have a view contrary to yours is lame.

You mean like this?

gage
To be honest if you have several of these guns, YOU need to question your sanity and logic.

Do as I say not as I do, right?

And I would bet my whole argument that 90% of you here couldnt tell me what your 3rd Amedment was without looking it up. :cry:

You are probably correct in assuming that most people don't know all of the amendments by heart. Do you? What's the 5th? The 8th? without looking them up. Are you a constitutional scholar now? What's your point? That some people only focus on the Constitutional Amendments that matter to them, only when those amendments are under attack? I will stand up for anyone of the Constitutional Amendments even if I had to research what it meant. Your point has no validity since not everyone on both sides of this disagreement knows all of the Amendments by heart, even if you do.

This is the real second amendmenthttp://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/real-rationale-2nd-amendment-right-wingers-are-totally-ignorant-about
Seriously? You falsely accuse me of using "trumped up NRA stats", which they weren't and accuse myself and others of being "brainwashed by right wing media, Fox News and Rush Limbaugh",. then you post a link to a liberal blog, whose Executive Director has edited and co-edited several books, including;Dangerous Brew: Exposing the Tea Party's Agenda to Take Over America,Start Making Sense: Turning the Lessons of Election 2004 into Winning Progressive Politics, The 99%: How Occupy Wall Street Movement is Changing America
And staff from lliberal left leaning rags like: Association of Alternative Newsweeklies, LA Weekly, San Francisco Bay Guardian, Mother Jones, The New Republic, the Village Voice,The Nation,The Advocate, the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, the San Francisco Chronicle and the New York Daily News,and the Huffington Post? You can't be serious.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution"For 100 years, the Supreme Court said that the second part of the text had nothing to do with individuals' rights to bear arms.

I find nothing that exactly matches you're above statement, so I can only surmise that you've altered the text to suit your goal of trying to convince myself and others that somehow the Supreme Court is wrong by making the Heller decision, and yes I am well aware of Heller.
The Supreme Court has never made a decision on the individual right to bear arms until Heller. Show me one SC case in the last 100 years that where they ruled it's not an individual right. None of the cases in your Wiki link have to do with the individual right to bear arms.


But four years ago, the Supreme Court, in a case called “Heller,” said the Second Amendment does mean that individuals have the right to a handgun at home."

You're damn right they should. Washington DC, where the Heller case originated, has one of the highest crime rates in the country, despite the previous ban on handguns and some of the most restrictive firearms laws in the country.. But yet you lefties fail to acknowledge that CRIMINALS DON'T OBEY LAWS!!!

LONG POST WARNING (again)
Self Defense with firearms stats. The source for the stat follow the stat. See if you can follow along.

* A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 0.5% of households had members who had used a gun for defense during a situation in which they thought someone "almost certainly would have been killed" if they "had not used a gun for protection." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 162,000 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard."[12]

[12] Paper: "Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun." By Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Fall 1995. http://www.law.northwestern.edu/jclc/backissues/86-1.html



* Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] [17] Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, March 2000. http://www.springerlink.com/content/rngn3274255v6j67/

U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18]

[18] As shown in the previous footnote, this study did not use a nationally representative population. To correct for this, Just Facts used the following equation:



t = c × g × p / [n × r × [[s × d / f] + [(1-s) × (1- d) / (1- f)]]]

Where:

t = Total defensive gun uses in a nationally representative population

c = Defensive gun uses in this survey, civilian against offender, clear = 48

g = Minimum proportion of households with a gun = 0.34*

p = Population, ages 25-70 = 158,799,375†

n = Survey sample size = 3006

r = Proportion of survey respondents with a gun in their home = .83

s = Proportion of survey respondents who are female = .25

d = Proportion of defensive gun uses by females = .46‡

f = Proportion of population (ages 25-70) who are females = .51†

* A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 3.5% of households had members who had used a gun "for self-protection or for the protection of property at home, work, or elsewhere." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 1,029,615 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard."[19]


[19] Paper: "Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun." By Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Fall 1995. http://www.law.northwestern.edu/jclc/backissues/86-1.html

* A 1994 survey conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that Americans use guns to frighten away intruders who are breaking into their homes about 498,000 times per year.[20]

[20] Paper: "Estimating intruder-related firearm retrievals in U.S. households, 1994." By Robin M. Ikeda and others. Violence and Victims, Winter 1997. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9591354


* A 1982 survey of male felons in 11 state prisons dispersed across the U.S. found:[21]
[21] Book: Armed and Considered Dangerous: A Survey of Felons and Their Firearms (Expanded Edition). By James D. Wright and Peter D. Rossi. Aldine De Gruyter, 1986 (Expanded edition published in 1994).

• 34% had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"

• 40% had decided not to commit a crime because they "knew or believed that the victim was carrying a gun"

• 69% personally knew other criminals who had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"[22]


[22] Same as above ([21}). Page 155
I know its just liberal scare tactics and hallucinations. :crazy::D O no wait its history.... :eek::idea::idea:;);)
Yea, it is Liberal scare tactics. I just proved it with the facts above. Even friggin criminals admit that armed people don't make good victims. And yup, it is history: History shows armed people stop and prevent crime aannndd apprehend or help apprehend criminals

So no NRA trumpted up stats, just facts, including admissions from criminals.

You have no right to tell gun owners what you feel is a legitimate weapon, just like gun owners have no right to tell you you have to buy one. You don't want one? Fine, but don't try to tell me I can' t have one.

Guns are not responsible for crimes, people are. If they want to commit a crime they will find a weapon if they don't have access to guns. Just like this nutcase in China.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/12/22-kids-slashed-in-china-elementary-school-knife-attack/
Oh look!! They're teaching teachers and school workers how to defend themselves in case of anotherknife attack. They are also increasing security and stepping up police patrols around schools. Why don't they just ban knives? These Communists don't allow their citizens to have guns, why should they have knives.

Your emotional insecurities and leftist blog drivel don't qualify as factual reference to enforce your belief that law abiding citizens should be told what firearms they can have.

I've challenged you several times to show me your facts to support your view, but you can't and won't. You have none. Your emotions and feelings aren't facts
You've had ample time and opportunity to show my facts to be wrong, but you can't.

ezmoney keeps liking your posts and even he doesn't chime in with any facts to help you out or support both of your

[Scootertrash]

http://youtu.be/XMg0FQS6Fqo

Not only did he save his and his sister's lives, he may have ended the home invasions for the whole neighborhood.

Now what was your argument again??

Just think.. You and the Burglar that got shot both have something in common.. You're both for Gun Control..

Good shoot young man!
Thanks for posting D!

[gage]

....................... Im not saying it would have stoped the shooting, jeasus missing the point again... What if the kid didnt have 30 rounds mags or better yet what if he had a actual hunting rifle??
Gage,Read the whole text of the decision.... "...determined that handguns are "arms" for the purposes of the Second Amendment (along with rifles and shotguns)..." Did you not read other any other paragraph or sentence in either links? It wasn't until 2008 that the supreme made that decision, after they were bought out by the NRA, every other case determined other wise. And omg, again:cry: you cannot compare an assault rifle/weapon to a freaking yamaha R1, we just went over this (comparing them to cars) they do not serve any legitimate purpose in any shape or form for a civilian, and are actually designed to kill some one......The question isnt weather its overkill to own so they should just ban anything that is, its that they again serve no purpose and are overkill.
then in turn making it even easier for them by banning guns... Again Im not sure if your hearing what Im saying or if that was typo, I NEVER SAID BAN GUNS, just Assault rifles/weapons. You agree to the fact that some people should not own one, but cant agree that those same people (who shouldn't have one but obviously do) don't leave these things lying around? You really believe this? That some people are not this irresponsible? And dont say "well just because a few dont follow the rules doesnt mean you ban them for the rest of us" . No ones gonna come and take your Assault rifle/weapon away, thats not what a ban means, the last one just stop makers from producing them and selling them like candy to people. And criminals can easily buy them now, so how would a ban hurt again? O because it would create a monopoly where good guys dont have them and bad guys do... Give a break..:crazy:

Guns are not responsible for crimes, people are. If they want to commit a crime they will find a weapon if they don't have access to guns. Just like this nutcase in China.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/12/22-kids-slashed-in-china-elementary-school-knife-attack/
Oh look!! They're teaching teachers and school workers how to defend themselves in case of anotherknife attack. They are also increasing security and stepping up police patrols around schools. Why don't they just ban knives? These Communists don't allow their citizens to have guns, why should they have knives.
Buddy guess what all those kids survived!!! Not like the ones over here.....

[fabiodriven]

Just something quick here as I'm posting from my phone.

Gage, one huge thing that you're overlooking here- Starting to ban certain guns is just opening the door to banning even more of them. Once this door is opened, expect it to be a battle from here on out until eventually we're fighting to hang on to the scraps, and then we could ultimately end up with nothing at all. Once they're done with gun rights, expect it to move on to other rights from there.

[gage]

Just something quick here as I'm posting from my phone.

Gage, one huge thing that you're overlooking here- Starting to ban certain guns is just opening the door to banning even more of them. Once this door is opened, expect it to be a battle from here on out until eventually we're fighting to hang on to the scraps, and then we could ultimately end up with nothing at all. Once it's done with gun rights, expect it to move on to other rights from there. So your thinking is motivated by irrational fears..... They already ban certain things man, this is no different. Come back with something better, turn off Rush Limbaugh I think I hear it in the background....

[RIDE-RED 250r]

Just something quick here as I'm posting from my phone.

Gage, one huge thing that you're overlooking here- Starting to ban certain guns is just opening the door to banning even more of them. Once this door is opened, expect it to be a battle from here on out until eventually we're fighting to hang on to the scraps, and then we could ultimately end up with nothing at all. Once it's done with gun rights, expect it to move on to other rights from there.

What you are describing in a nutshell Fab is progressivism... small steps and nudges here and there over a long period of time with the end goal being pretty much fascism, socialism, totalitarianism, etc...

I have refrained from even viewing this thread because I am SOOOOOO sick and tired of hearing all the liberal/progressive dribble placing blame and accountability on anything and everything (including the inanimate objects used) but the subhuman scum that commited this atrocious, heinus act. And no, I am not talking about expecting a bunch of liberal firearms control here persay either...

Admittedly, I have not taken the time to read all 7 pages here, but I just need to say that first and foremost I cannot express how this tragedy has hit me between the eyes. I have 2 kids right around the age of those poor kids that were murdered and I just cannot get this whole thing out of my head.... I can't stop thinking about the horror that day as that scumbag so senselessly did what he did... Never in my life has the fate of people I don't even know effected me in the way that this has, not even 9/11...

Now that I have said that, I'll say this....

The word "arms" as referred to in the 2nd means anything from a broadsword, to cannon and everything in netween if were are talking in the historical context of the time it was written. The term "small arms" was in use then if they wanted to just protect the right to keep and bear small arms. As precisely as the contitution and bill of rights was written, haggled over and debated does anyone REALLY believe the founders intended enything other than to protect the rights of the citizens to have access to everything the government does?? Read the letters between Jefferson and Madison if you are still unsure. The 2nd was NOT put in place to protect the "tradition of hunting" as our liberal hack politicians like to assure us they are not going to attack. Back in 1791 hunting was NOT a tradition, it was a means of survival by most of the populace, at least on the frontier. So that logic is total failure.... The 2nd was put into place to insure the citizens would have a last resort means of fending off an overgrown, unconstitutional government as they foresaw would happen... And what do ya know, here we are.....

So, the typical liberal arguement of how far should it go, "do you think every citizen should have access to a tank, or RPG, or nuke?" Answer: consitutionally, YES! With the intent of the 2nd being what it is, we the people have the constitutional right to anything the government does.... Is it practical in this day and age?? Of course not.

The thing we have to remember is that "All men are created equal and are endowed by the creator with certain inalienable rights".... That means that our rights are NOT granted by man, the federal government, etc. And therefore cannot be taken away by the above either, PERIOD! So, here we are, our hack, progressive politicians are about to punish the whole of society for the actions of a statistical drop of water in the ocean. This is morally wrong in a "free" country as we once had it...

Allow me a slight digression here, I find it laughable at best that progressive libs try to make a constitutional issue out of things like gay marriage, abortion, etc when those issues are not even mentioned in the constitution.. Yet, at the same time they attack and restrict a right that the founders found it important enough to specifically include it??!!

I find it disingenuos that the "right for a woman to choose"... (to dismember and unborn child in the womb) is now some fabricated constitutional right, but my right to choose if and by what means I protect my family and property is somehow some danger to society that needs the utmost restriction if not eliminated all together... Let me tell you something, I have high capacity magazines for certain of my weapons.. And you know what, it's nobodies business but MINE!!! I have a CWP, and you know what?? It's nobodies business but MINE!!!

I will not comply, I will not register, I will not surrender, and I will not be a defenseless victim of anything be it over reaching government or a random lunatic nutjob that wants to go a rampage or invade my home and property.... If it needs be, I go down shooting, but at least I go down standing for something...

And lastly to clarify for our progressive/lib friends who want to ake our rights away...

-"GUN" is a belt-fed, fully automatic machine gun or a piece of artillery..
-"RIFLE" is hand held, single shot, semi-auto, burst/full auto weapon carried and fired by one person
-"SHOTGUN" is a single or double barreled weapon that can fire single or multiple projectiles with one pull of the trigger.
-"PISTOL" is a handheld firearm, semi-automatic
-"REVOLVER" is another type of handheld firearm that uses a cylinder with a capacity of 5 or more rounds that rotates 1 chamber after each shot fired
-"MAGAZINE" is what you are actually referring to when you want to restrict capacity. Old military rifles from the WWII era and earlier used clips and most only held 5 to 10 rounds.

If you want to talk about controlling them, at least try to sound like you know what you are talking about!

That is all....

[RIDE-RED 250r]

So your thinking is motivated by irrational fears..... They already ban certain things man, this is no different. Come back with something better, turn off Rush Limbaugh I think I hear it in the background....

History proves where the course we are on will likely end up.

I remember all the Bush haters rambling on about the definition of insanity... doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result... Yeah, did you forget about that??!!

The best way to see where we are going is to look back at where we've been... Unless of course you don't know or care about history.,......

To call Fabs fears "irrational" is naive at best. He is dead on.

Think on these.... Whom do you agree with?? Wise men like this or the political hacks of today??? Choose your side, I have chosen mine.


"The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."
George Washington



"Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples' liberty's teeth."
George Washington



"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin

[HuffieVA]

Im not saying it would have stoped the shooting, jeasus missing the point again... What if the kid didnt have 30 rounds mags or better yet what if he had a actual hunting rifle?? Did you not read other any other paragraph or sentence in either links? It wasn't until 2008 that the supreme made that decision, after they were bought out by the NRA, every other case determined other wise. And omg, again:cry: you cannot compare an assault rifle/weapon to a freaking yamaha R1, we just went over this (comparing them to cars) they do not serve any legitimate purpose in any shape or form for a civilian, and are actually designed to kill some one......The question isnt weather its overkill to own so they should just ban anything that is, its that they again serve no purpose and are overkill. Again Im not sure if your hearing what Im saying or if that was typo, I NEVER SAID BAN GUNS, just Assault rifles/weapons. You agree to the fact that some people should not own one, but cant agree that those same people (who shouldn't have one but obviously do) don't leave these things lying around? You really believe this? That some people are not this irresponsible? And dont say "well just because a few dont follow the rules doesnt mean you ban them for the rest of us" . No ones gonna come and take your Assault rifle/weapon away, thats not what a ban means, the last one just stop makers from producing them and selling them like candy to people. And criminals can easily buy them now, so how would a ban hurt again? O because it would create a monopoly where good guys dont have them and bad guys do... Give a break..:crazy:

So let me get this straight, you can compare landmines (by the way have been widely "banned" by the international community since the mid to late 90's) why? because they have unwanted after effets (i.e. one gets left in place after a war and a child inadvertently steps on it thirty years later...) to a gun that even with the scenario of one being left in the open after a war would require an action on the part of the finder (whether a conscious action or not) in order for it to cause any harm, but guess what Gage, I know of very few people that would pay $500/$1000/$2000 for a weapon and let it lay in a field, do you? Unless of course it was a criminal trying to get rid of a weapon that he more than likely obtained illegally in the first place. this brings us full circle in the argument to actually punish criminals and to protect law abiding citizens through revamping the way we deal with insane individuals. I asked you to define an assault weapon... yet other than a scary look and large magazine you haven't offered your explanation/definition. You asked for an example of when someone (a citizen) might actually need more than ten rounds, I gave you one, you can say that's a one in a million, well so is crashing a plane into a prominent NYC building but we take steps to ensure it doesn't happen again, a law abiding citizen owning what you consider an assault rifle will never effect the way you live your life or impede your daily schedule in any way, but you still take your shoes off at the airport... and trailprotrailprotrailprotrailprotrailpro about the security measures (pretty sure everyone does), the difference there is that we all understand that even though its a pain in the ass it could protect us from another tragedy so we all tend to put up with a little bit of hassle for the safety of everyone involved. The problem here is your looking at making a feel good decision to ban something that isn't the problem and likely wont solve or prevent one crazy person from acting out in one way or another when they finally snap... I personally would rather have them snap in a rubber room rather than a classroom (and I believe most people would, likely yourself included) so when I ask are we going to address the subject of involuntary committal of of dangerously insane individuals? Or how about taking the revolving doors off of our courthouses?

[TimSr]

Im not saying it would have stoped the shooting, jeasus missing the point again... What if the kid didnt have 30 rounds mags or better yet what if he had a actual hunting rifle??


if the guy had a "hunting rifle" it would have been 2-3 times more powerful. .223 IS a hunting rifle for prairie dogs and ground hogs. Had he had three or four 7 rd clips it may have taken him up to 5 seconds longer, 1994 lever action .30-30 it may have taken up to 15 seconds longer for him to kill a classrooom full of 7 year olds, and a .30-06 bolt action rifle, maybe less time, maybe more because one bullet can pass through 3 or 4 people bunched together. With a double action revolver, I can discharge 30 rounds in less than a minute, including reloading. With a machete, it may have taken him a full minute to kill 20 children, but I doubt it. A baseball bat, about the same.

Why is it when you suggest killing a shooter, the only "sensible" response offered as a btter solution is legislation that if obeyed by a murderer would force him to kill slightly more slowly.

[Slingblade]

This is clearly not getting anywhere. (What if ...magazine, What if..armed security) And while I'm intrigued in the thread, all the reading is beginning to hurt my eyes. But I do have a question for the gun control advocates.

What EXACTLY is it you would like to see done?? It seems they want to point their anger at gun owners and the NRA over the massacre just to have someone to blame, and they want something done--Right Now!!

Please understand something, Every American in their right mind, from a tree-hugger to a hardcore Biker club member, feels the same way about the massacre of children. We are devastated, and pissed at the same time.

So...Do you want to ban semi auto rifles, ban and confiscate high round clips by going door to door? Or just ban the rifles that have a certain look, with all the attachments and such? I'm really confused, really I am..

Or, do you just want to SEE the President or some law maker signing a law that will ban all these things, will that actually make you feel safer? Please.. While they've got their pens warm, tell them to make murder, robbery

and rape illegal.. That should put an end to the violence. The reality is, no matter what laws they pass, crime is going to be prevalant, including mass shootings. I won't start googling for stats but I'm going to assume we've

got several books full of several laws in place now. But 1 more will do the trick, right? And the criminals will surely obey this one, especially the mentally disturbed, suicidal ones.

New laws of any kind will do nothing to affect criminals. And we can't go back in time and confiscate the lady's guns, before her son murders her and takes them to the school-- That is what we want, right?

More Government is not the answer to this problem, or any other if you ask me. What is the answer? God, I wish I knew, I really do..

[Scootertrash]

What if the kid didnt have 30 rounds mags or better yet what if he had a actual hunting rifle??
What if, what if? You don't want us using them why do you continue to use them? Desperation is why. Follow your own rule for this discussion. You are losing credibility with each post
What like a 30-30 or a 30-06? With a 5 round internal box magazine? Do you know how quickly a person can reload a bolt action rifle after their 5 shots are gone? THERE WAS NO ONE THERE TO STOP HIM.

after they were bought out by the NRA,

Seriously? Talk about irrational fears. The NRA bought out no one. Where do you get this crap?

they do not serve any legitimate purpose in any shape or form for a civilian, and are actually designed to kill some one
No friggin sh!t. What gun isn't designed to kill?

......The question isnt weather its overkill to own so they should just ban anything that is, its that they again serve no purpose and are overkill.
English...Do you speak it?

Again Im not sure if your hearing what Im saying or if that was typo, I NEVER SAID BAN GUNS, just Assault rifles/weapons. :crazy:

You agree to the fact that some people should not own one, but cant agree that those same people (who shouldn't have one but obviously do) don't leave these things lying around? You really believe this? That some people are not this irresponsible?
We've covered this already. More of your irrational fears coming out. Just because a very small minoritiy are irresponsible doesn't mean the ones who follow the rules should be punished

And dont say "well just because a few dont follow the rules doesnt mean you ban them for the rest of us"

Because you think that they should ban them because of a very small minority are irresponsible? They did it with three wheelers

. No ones gonna come and take your Assault rifle/weapon away, thats not what a ban means, the last one just stop makers from producing them and selling them like candy to people.
Like candy?/ Really?:rolleyes:
And criminals can easily buy them now,
Really? How so? Prove it. And if they can buy them so easily now, what is going to stop them from buying them easily after a ban with millions of them in circulation? The majority of criminals get their guns illegally. For the umpteenth time:CRIMINALS DON'T FOLLOW LAWS
Do actually know what you have to do to buy a firearm? You have to fill out a form, the dealer calls in your information to the FBI and they do a background check on you. If you can't pass a set of legal standards which includes your criminal background, spousal abuse, restraining orders, mental health and drug abuse, among other things, you are denied the ability to purchase that firearm


so how would a ban hurt again? O because it would create a monopoly where good guys dont have them and bad guys do
As a matter fo fact it does.

Take a look at crime in Australia after they banned guns.

... Give a break..:crazy:
No
Buddy guess what all those kids survived!!! Not like the ones over here.....

These didn't:
"On March 23, 2010, Zheng Minsheng (郑民生)[2] 41, murdered eight children with a knife in an elementary school in Nanping"

May 12, 2010 An attacker named Wu Huanming (吴环明), 48, killed seven children at a kindergarten in Hanzhong, Shaanxi

On 4 August 2010, 26-year-old Fang Jiantang killed 3 children and 1 teacher, at a kindergarten in Zibo, Shandong province

In September 2011, a young girl and three adults taking their children to nursery school were killed in Gongyi,[19] Henan by 30-year-old Wang Hongbin with an axe.

Happy that I proved my point again?




You really are a glutton for punishment aren't you?

[TimSr]

Tim, The last report I heard was that he did use the Bushmaster in the murders. Personally, I think we'll know once the investigation is complete.



I guess it doesn't really matter which guns he shot whom with. The simple fact is that they were all lawfully owned by his mother in full compliance with Connecticut's assault weapons ban which was more stringent than the federal one it was based on. According to the 1990's federal ban which had and AND Connecticut's current assault weapons ban, no assault weapon was used in this shooting, and Im pretty sure that murdering your mother and stealing her guns is also illegal in most states.

[Scootertrash]

This is clearly not getting anywhere. (What if ...magazine, What if..armed security) And while I'm intrigued in the thread, all the reading is beginning to hurt my eyes. But I do have a question for the gun control advocates.

What EXACTLY is it you would like to see done?? It seems they want to point their anger at gun owners and the NRA over the massacre just to have someone to blame, and they want something done--Right Now!!

Please understand something, Every American in their right mind, from a tree-hugger to a hardcore Biker club member, feels the same way about the massacre of children. We are devastated, and pissed at the same time.

So...Do you want to ban semi auto rifles, ban and confiscate high round clips by going door to door? Or just ban the rifles that have a certain look, with all the attachments and such? I'm really confused, really I am..


Or, do you just want to SEE the President or some law maker signing a law that will ban all these things, will that actually make you feel safer? Please.. While they've got their pens warm, tell them to make murder, robbery

and rape illegal.. That should put an end to the violence. The reality is, no matter what laws they pass, crime is going to be prevalant, including mass shootings. I won't start googling for stats but I'm going to assume we've

got several books full of several laws in place now. But 1 more will do the trick, right? And the criminals will surely obey this one, especially the mentally disturbed, suicidal ones.

New laws of any kind will do nothing to affect criminals. And we can't go back in time and confiscate the lady's guns, before her son murders her and takes them to the school-- That is what we want, right?

More Government is not the answer to this problem, or any other if you ask me. What is the answer? God, I wish I knew, I really do..

C'mon slingblade, let's not bring common sense into this, you'll confuse gage even more....... ;) :D

The answer is so very simple. Punish the criminals and monitor those who are mentally ill. Really, it's that simple. People like gage and his type think that controlling or banning an inanimate object will solve the problem. It won't. It's doesn't matter how a murder is committed, it took a human mind out of control to complete the murder or assault. A weapon, any weapon, cannot perform a dastardly action it's own.

[Scootertrash]

I guess it doesn't really matter which guns he shot whom with. The simple fact is that they were all lawfully owned by his mother in full compliance with Connecticut's assault weapons ban which was more stringent than the federal one it was based on. According to the 1990's federal ban which had and AND Connecticut's current assault weapons ban, no assault weapon was used in this shooting, and Im pretty sure that murdering your mother and stealing her guns is also illegal in most states.

I'm right with ya Tim. ;)

[gage]

Wow I cant continue repeating what Ive stated 2 to 5 times already. You guys are hopeless this thread is going nowhere, people just jumping in without reading what Ive or others have said before. Just like how I gave you a a specific definition on what a assault rifle/weapon is in my freaking link which tells you EXACTLY.. And I also cant understand how some of you are taking my comparison of assault rifles to landmines and giving me a fcking history lesson on them and how they're used:confused:.... Then taking the debate back to comparing cars/bikes to assault rifles/weapons. I must be speaking in Chinese. The amount of sheer ignorance on the 2nd amendment is saddest part.. Im done this is pathetic no point in even trying any more.

[HuffieVA]

...The amount of sheer ignorance on the 2nd amendment is saddest part...

You spelled "My" wrong....

[fabiodriven]

And away he goes with no point proven. Same outcome every time with these people.

[dcreel]

And away he goes with no point proven. Same outcome every time with these people.

My favorite part is how he skipped right over my post with the video of the 14 year old kid while protecting his 12 year old sister shot 1 of 2 burglars breaking into his home with the very weapon he wants banned..

Honestly, I think we should ban liberals to save what's left of the United States..

[Stonewall]

My favorite part is how he skipped right over my post with the video of the 14 year old kid while protecting his 12 year old sister shot 1 of 2 burglars breaking into his home with the very weapon he wants banned..

Honestly, I think we should ban liberals to save what's left of the United States..

X2 on that one!

I like how he keeps calling his opinion and links to liberal's opinions "facts".....

The biggest problem in this country today, is that people are too proud and stuck up to admit when they're wrong.

[Thorpe]

And away he goes with no point proven. Same outcome every time with these people.

I am ok with that... Just as long as he goes away!

[RIDE-RED 250r]

And away he goes with no point proven. Same outcome every time with these people.

He is what we here who live in the real world call a "pseudo-intellectual"....


I like something I heard Uncle Ted say to Joe Pags last week... Paraphrasing here, You go ahead and work on removing ALL firearms from the face of the planet to keep firearm violence from ever happening again... While you're doing that, in the interest of preventing another human drowning, I will begin working on removing all water from the planet.... That's about how much sense the lib/progresives make... It's intellectually dishonest.

[CRAZY70MAN]

I am ok with that... Just as long as he goes away!

lol.....:lol:

[Scootertrash]

You spelled "My" wrong....
I read that as I was guzzling...errr I mean sipping my beer.
Huffie, You owe me a keyboard!! I had to think about it for a second, but....http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-laughing001.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys.php)http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-laughing001.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys.php)http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-laughing001.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys.php)

[riverrat]

Ok, cut the crap. If you think a car/truck is not a necessity you are mentally unfit to own a bb gun or even a squirt gun. I'm not going to walk (nor ride a horse) 15 miles to work in the winter every morning, and neither is anyone else I know.



You cut the crap... :) A car is not a necessity for many people. It may be a necessity for you. Just like a gun, a gun is a necessity for some people, but not for others. There is also probably millions of "joy ride only" cars in America, things like classic cars, race cars, etc. People who live in the cities (where most of the anti-gun liberal nuts live) do not need cars or guns. That is why they head the charge with "green" cars and anti-gun laws.

My point is, whether something is a necissity or not does not determine if we have a right to it or not. Also, in both cases, it is not the vehicle, or the gun that is the cause of the accidents they cause (unless they are defictive, which is another story). My point is, this is America, and we should have a right to buy, own, ride, shoot what we want, so long as we aren't hurting other people with it.

So I am fit to have a gun eh?

[riverrat]

Gage, you seem like an intelligent person, but I take offense at your stance on all this. You are not getting it really. You are pretty ignorant if you ask me. Have you ever been in a storm ravaged area? Have you ever seen the kaos that insues? Around here things were getting pretty crazy during hurricane Sandy. Look at Katrina and all the looting and shooting. When everything is normal, yea there is no real need to own an assault weapon, but things are never gauranteed to be normal, and when you need one, you wouldn't be able to get one. We are always moments from disaster, no matter were you live. Hence we are always moments away from needing protection for yourself and loved ones. I am not sitting around on my ass waiting for the government to come and save me from the bad people in this life, I maintain the right to protect myself from those isiots, and even from my government.

Why they want to ban guns when there are crazy people out there like this idiot in Conn.?

[Dirtcrasher]

I am not a gun guy. When one of my buds carried a gun it made me feel safer.

However, I do know we have the right to bear arms and protect ourselves. Can they legally get rid of the (BAD!) guns? maybe so. The corrupt government can do what they want. Anyone who resists will probably be labeled as a "Danger to society!" And either brought to court or shot.

It isn't fair to the collectors that don't aim to hurt anyone and are proud of their collection. Yes the US seems to have allot of deaths by gunshot; So what if these ban some guns. Don't you think they will just use a pistol to kill people if they are hell bent on doing it? I do.

Ban all you want, it won't fix these bipolar individuals and they will simply find other ways to kill people.

It's the PEOPLE using guns and not the guns. If all we had was cross bows? explosives? there would still be killings. If they want to do it, then do it.


MOM should have never given her safe combination to her son who was nuts, but she did.

Not all gun owners hunt, they just want to feel protected and in this society, I would too.

Yes games are more violent but what happened when YOU got in trouble? Your game was taken away by MOM for a week.

Good parents are instrumental on raising children; But struggling to survive with 2 parents working doesn't help but it doesn't make them killers.

I was raised with a newly made paddle every time I screwed up. The sound of the stairs and dad going to the basement to make a new one every time terrified me. But my parents tried to raise 2 good boys.

Again, I LIKE that someone has a gun when we are deep in the woods and trained to use it. I feel much safer.

[Scootertrash]

It's the PEOPLE using guns and not the guns. If all we had was cross bows? explosives? there would still be killings. If they want to do it, then do it.

Good parents are instrumental on raising children; But struggling to survive with 2 parents working doesn't help but it doesn't make them killers.

I was raised with a newly made paddle every time I screwed up. The sound of the stairs and dad going to the basement to make a new one every time terrified me. But my parents tried to raise 2 good boys.



I know you get it Dirtcrasher, unfortunately there are some here that don't and probably never will.

One other bad thing is that sometimes no matter how good a job a parent does, sometimes a person is just haywired from birth and no matter how hard you try you can't correct it or override it.

A couple of us have posted Ben Franklin's "trade a little security for freedom" quote, Here's another good one from another one of the Founding Fathers, Samuel Adams:

"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen."

-- Samuel Adams

[RIDE-RED 250r]

OK, in a nutshell for our pro-weapons controll friends here on 3ww...

Blaming certain weapons for crimes and death is exactly the same as the hacks that blamed trikes for ATV deaths and got them banned.... Get it??

[swampthang]

Last night on Christmas Eve a chubby kid prolly 13 yrs old pointed a pistol at me as I drove past him on the sidewalk. Maybe a toy? bb gun? 9mm? hard to tell he was smiling so I gave him the finger. LOL He was old enough to know not to piont a gun at a stranger expecialy in these rough times. Parents need to control there kids better IMO.

[Thorpe]

Last night on Christmas Eve a chubby kid prolly 13 yrs old pointed a pistol at me as I drove past him on the sidewalk. Maybe a toy? bb gun? 9mm? hard to tell he was smiling so I gave him the finger. LOL He was old enough to know not to piont a gun at a stranger expecialy in these rough times. Parents need to control there kids better IMO.

That kid needed a Christmas Eve trailprotrailprotrailprotrailprotrailpro whooping!

[Slingblade]

A little Holiday humor, but true.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPiOKNGlknY&feature=player_detailpage

[CRAZY70MAN]

The sad story of the firefighter shooting in New York was on the news. Why does the media have to drag in the "Bushmaster" rifle they found at the home that the murderer ....and I quote "Could have used'"???? It's not bad enough lives were lost and the families are still greiving without the media trying to throw some more gas on the fire. I wish they would stay focused on the facts of what happened. Ya, they showed the same old picture of the bushmaster rifle on my news broadcast this morning, the one he did not use. So tired of the media blowin' sh%$ out of proportion.

[Howdy]

I have noticed that most ( if not all ) the anti-gun activist are the ones that voted for obama. This leads me to think that they want the Good guys dis-armed so that they can not only get their freebies from the Gov but they can also use the weapons they have to comit crimes and get other peoples stuff as well.

Most if not all these mass shootings have resulted from people with mental illness of some sort. The Liberal media is pushing for gun control and they talk about it ALL THE TIME. How ever they are not pushing the underlying cause of all of these killings: mental health awareness / help, or anything as such that could help STOP these killings.

Hmmm, Must be they don't want to push this subject because they are afraid of getting themselves commited. Common sense tells you they are Nuts!!!

If your going to take my guns ( good luck with that. LOL ) then take away all the Gov feebies for the lazy "edited" that just want hand outs.
Howdy

[dcreel]

You go Chuck..


http://youtu.be/evEg1VNfX3o

[TecateDan]

All I can say is even if you could take away the guns how would it have stopped the worst school masacre in the US ever. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster The most tragic school killing of all had nothing to do with guns or violent media or video games. How about Timothy McVeigh the attack killed 168 people and injured over 800. Why are we not banning Diesel and fertilizer??


Like so many have said it's not a gun issue it's a mental health issue

[Howdy]

A good example...

160040

[El Camexican]

http://news.yahoo.com/video-released-nyc-suspect-fatal-subway-push-112847851.html

Seems the mentally disturbed have found another way to kill without guns. I've never been on an NYC subway, but in Mexico City it would be easy to push six or more at a time off the platform when things are busy and everyone is standing on the edge. Just another example of how just about anything can be used to end a life if that is the intent of the perpetrator.

[Mosh]

A good example...

160040 as funny as that is...most of the trailprotrailprotrailprotrailprotrailprotrailprotr ailpro's in society today still cant grasp things even if you draw it in crayons or stick figures..They certainly can't listen...

[dcreel]

http://news.yahoo.com/video-released-nyc-suspect-fatal-subway-push-112847851.html

Seems the mentally disturbed have found another way to kill without guns. I've never been on an NYC subway, but in Mexico City it would be easy to push six or more at a time off the platform when things are busy and everyone is standing on the edge. Just another example of how just about anything can be used to end a life if that is the intent of the perpetrator.

Having stood on the Subway platform as a Subway train goes by, I can tell you I had a seriously scary feeling and kept a weary eye out while waiting for the Subway train. I am surprised this doesn't happen more often than it does..

How about the lady in Vegas who attacked a coworker at the Bellagio with 2 razor blades. Turns out she may have murdered the 10 year old daughter of a friend right before the attack at the Bellagio. A week before she visited her doctor and told him she needed to be admitted because "she felt like she wanted to harm someone".

Where does the responsibility begin and end? If I was that dr. I would feel like I had the opportunity to stop a murder and a serious attack.

[HuffieVA]

All I know is that in the last 24 hours I've had my hands on a chainsaw, hammer, knife, axe, motorcycle chain, glass bottle, tire iron, screw driver, broken glass, concrete block, steel pipe, electrical cord, motor vehicle, gasoline, a case of beer, a jar of peanut butter and at least one large rock (and that's just off the top of my head) all of which have certainly killed (different ones of course) in the past killed multiple people... The fact is, if I or anyone else for that matter was hell bent on killing someone you wouldn't have to look very far or very long to find something to get the job done. On the other hand its pretty damn far fetched to think I could defend my family during a home invasion with an extension cord...

Like I said before, you want to stop crazy people from doing crazy things you need to separate them from mainstream society, I'll pull an example out of thin air.... "Let's say someone beats their elderly Grandmother to death with, oh I don't know, lets say a hammer..." who in their right mind could sit on the parole board and say, "Ya know, I think this guy needs another shot...":crazy:

Don't get me wrong, I don't think you should chop a kids hand off for stealing a loaf of bread but just to think someone can be released (ever) after beating their own Grandmother to death with a hammer really pisses me off...

[The Goat]

Ok, cut the crap. If you think a car/truck is not a necessity you are mentally unfit to own a bb gun or even a squirt gun. I'm not going to walk (nor ride a horse) 15 miles to work in the winter every morning, and neither is anyone else I know.

The point I was trying to make is the "gun nuts" (sorry but people use "trikeoholic" and "trike nut" on here and it doesnt bother me) arguement always revolves around some fictitious scenario. Where is this "angry mob" or intruders not going down after 6 shots? My neighbor "selling me out for a loaf of bread" ............. WTF is that insane drivel? Where do you people live, I will be sure not to go there. (I do admit I live in a pretty nice, safe area) If the pro gun people stuck to facts instead of resorting to paranoid rants they might not look so bad. Stop trying to justify the high capacity magazines and assault rifles and call it what it is, a fun, dangerous toy that needs to be respected. As much as you would like to believe, you wont be running around with your AR-15 shooting zombies, saving the day during the apocalypse. Stick to the facts, such as- most everyone IS a responsible gun owner and thousands upon thousands of "gun aficianados" enjoy their firearms everyday, safely, without incident.

Scootertrash, thanks for the sarcastic explaination of "assault rifle". Nice try on attempting to educate me as if I had no clue as to what the definition of "assault rifle" is. It reminds me of someone getting bent out of shape when their three wheeler is called a "trike". The fact is that 99.9% of the population calls any gun that looks like an "assault rifle" an assault rifle, go figure. Even my hardcore "gun nut" friends refer to their non "assault rifles", assault rifles. And no, I don't have any problem with "assault rifles", just with some of their unstable users. After all, guns don't kill people.

With all this gun talk it motivated me to go out target shooting with two of my close buddies yesterday. It was an awesome day because it had snowed the night before then got nice and sunny. I hadn't been out shooting in years. We went way up in the mountains and made some fresh tracks, wish I would have got pics. I got to shoot my buddies new (to him) Ruger PC4, pretty sweet carbine! Trust me guys, the last thing I am for is more government regulations. I couldn't imagine someone telling me I can't go out and have the fun I had yesterday.:beer

Ever been stormed by an angry racist mob while trying to deliver water after a storm? Ever had to fire a few shots at the ground, drop supplies and roll out? No? Then shut up. You want fiction read a children's book. The facts are that a very large percentage of people today are apethetic or evil. 30 round mag, everyone in that f250 would have taken a thousand round mag. If a few shots wouldn't have scared them enough to back up, we did NOT have enough rounds to stop that mob.

There's your real life example from someone who was trying to help others after a natural disaster and got a healthy dose of the dark side of human thinking coupled with mob mentality. Just because you haven't experienced it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

[The Goat]

Also... to kill a large amount of people, a gun is a poor weapon. Its expensive, it requires bullets, maintenance, reloading supplies... bleh. I'm currently waiting for sleep in the parking lot of a Walmart on a road trip. Walmart has enough chemicals in the store unsupervised that anyone with knowledge of high-school chemistry could kill everyone in there without buying anything or arousing suspicion.

I've studied a lot of social deviance issues as well as extermination methods in third world countries...in every paper I've written the conclusion is always the same, those with in inability to resist societal pressures need to be removed from society, unfortunately there is no practical way of measurement or action.

People will always find a way to kill others... all it takes is time. Look up machete genocide.. its what really happens when they run out of guns and bullets in Africa.

If you don't think chaos can unfold in the US, take a gander at what has happened to every hegemonic society in history. Our time will come... it always does.

[ezmoney1979]

Ever been stormed by an angry racist mob while trying to deliver water after a storm? Ever had to fire a few shots at the ground, drop supplies and roll out? No? Then shut up. You want fiction read a children's book. The facts are that a very large percentage of people today are apethetic or evil. 30 round mag, everyone in that f250 would have taken a thousand round mag. If a few shots wouldn't have scared them enough to back up, we did NOT have enough rounds to stop that mob.

There's your real life example from someone who was trying to help others after a natural disaster and got a healthy dose of the dark side of human thinking coupled with mob mentality. Just because you haven't experienced it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Why would you give angry racists supplies dramatic tough guy?

[TimSr]

Why would you give angry racists supplies dramatic tough guy?

So people having the audacity to work disaster relief in predominately minority areas deserve mob attacks?

[ezmoney1979]

So people having the audacity to work disaster relief in predominately minority areas deserve mob attacks? Ummmm......... is this a trick question? Who said that? If we are talking about Katrina, who is the "minority" again? Refresh my memory for me.

[The Goat]

Tim hit the nail on the head.

The national guard weren't entering where we were and were instead dropping supplies via chopper. The difference is when they tried harming the national guard choppers... they replied with lethal force and painted orange X's on the bodies. If you think the government wont kill a few hundred people for being nothing more than terrified, you're crazy. They had so many bodies after Katrina they were storing them in refrigerated warehouses, gyms were converted to large morgues, it was disgusting.

In short, I've seen your "imaginary" scenario in real life. I certainly wouldn't be caught carrying a revolver in a situation like that. Hicapacity please. Force only respects faorce.

As for why I was giving water to the racist bastards... I'm not racist, some would say to a fault. At that time everyone got the benefit of the doubt. These days I consider everyone a piece of whit until I see otherwise.

[Scootertrash]

This quote is from a movie, Minority Report IIRC:


When the chips are down, when the pressure is on, every creature on the face of the Earth is interested in one thing and one thing only. Its own survival.

When I mention this quote to people, most of them reply with references to a true SHTF type scenario, not something like Katrina or similar "disasters". Problem is, when you have a society like we have today where a large segment of the population depends on the government, and/or believes that the government will come to the rescue, it doesn't take true "SHTF" for those people to go into survival mode. Katrina is/was a very good example. The Federal Government didn't fail the people of N.O., they failed themselves. They had plenty of advance warning, the city had plenty of buses to facilitate a large scale evacuation and were never utilized, The people were very poorly prepared for the residents of a city that is below sea level, and most importantly, They never listened to the very government they believe has their best interests in mind that told them to evacuate, but they then rely on them to come to the rescue? :wondering:crazy:

And what did the local government do when things got out of control?? Started confiscating firearms by force.......

(This next comment is not directed at Goat or ez, it's a generalization about racism ;))

As far as racists go, I seems to me that those that shout racism the loudest are some of the biggest racists. When you blame a segment of society a different race than yours for all of your races problems, that makes you a racist, and it goes both ways. But that's a whole other thread.

[The Goat]

Now stereotyping a group as racists would be wrong... but a group collectively shouting honkeys is kind of a freebie.

[swampthang]

Anybody that thinks racism is gone is a idiot. As long as there are different races there will always be racism. As for there ever being a need for a weapon like a high capacity AR I would think after a natural disaster would be the time to have one on hand. I seen the video clips of people acting like savages after Katrina and Sandy. Looting and acting like racist idiots. I seriously doudt thoes people were left after Katrina because they was black. Stupid maybe. Its so easy to play the race card. People need to get a thicker skin no matter what color it might be. Enough of the P.C. B.S.

[Thorpe]

Just got 4 NIB 30 round pmags today for my "weapon of mass destruction"... Had to pay panic price, but glad I got a few more!

[HuffieVA]

Just got 4 NIB 30 round pmags today for my "weapon of mass destruction"... Had to pay panic price, but glad I got a few more!

Wifey was very happy when I brought her home a fresh new Mini 14 this morning... (I beat the panic buyers though and found it a few weeks ago)
160542

[Scootertrash]

Pass this around to the anti gunners you know.

160676

160677

160678

This is the scumbag b**ch who illegally bought the guns for the guy that set the fire to kill those firemen
160679

160680

160681

160682

160683

[fabiodriven]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ooa98FHuaU0&sns=fb

[fabiodriven]

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/83012217/

[CRAZY70MAN]

Awesome John!!! Made the hair stand up on my neck as if I were the one telling that piece of crap the facts!!!!:lock::lock: That puss@ can go back to where he came from as far as I am concerned. I smell a revolution brother?????? For real:Bounce Great video!! Morgan is a little bitc#............. Wake up America!!!!! Now or never!!

[dcreel]

It makes me proud to know that Jeremy Clarkson punched Piers Morgan in the face.. lol

[Scootertrash]

He should have hit him harder. Morgan was in on the phone tapping scandal in Great Britain, along with producing fake photos of the British soldiers supposedly abusing afghan prisoners. He came here when the poo hit the fan for him over there. Pu**y

Besides the fact he is not a U.S. citizen, he has no right to tell us how we run our country. We kicked his sorry ass ancestors out of here over 200 years ago. Maybe we need to do it again just to remind him.

ETA: when Americans started a petition to deport Piers Morgan, not only did citizens of Great Britain start a petition to NOT send him back, Jeremy Clarkson, the British TV presenter famous for ‘Top Gear,’ joked, “Americans. It took us 40 years to get rid of Piers Morgan. Pleease don't send him back.”

:lol::lol::naughty::lol:

[CRAZY70MAN]

He should have hit him harder. Morgan was in on the phone tapping scandal in Great Britain, along with producing fake photos of the British soldiers supposedly abusing afghan prisoners. He came here when the poo hit the fan for him over there. Pu**y

Besides the fact he is not a U.S. citizen, he has no right to tell us how we run our country. We kicked his sorry ass ancestors out of here over 200 years ago. Maybe we need to do it again just to remind him.

ETA: when Americans started a petition to deport Piers Morgan, not only did citizens of Great Britain start a petition to NOT send him back, Jeremy Clarkson, the British TV presenter famous for ‘Top Gear,’ joked, “Americans. It took us 40 years to get rid of Piers Morgan. Pleease don't send him back.”

:lol::lol::naughty::lol:

LMAO!! The man without a country!! He needs another as#kicking IMO and he appears headed for one from Jones!! lol..........

[fabiodriven]

BTW, I tried to find that petition but I couldn't seem to locate it. Did they take it down or something? I feel highly compelled to sign that thing.

[Scootertrash]

They already sent it to the White House. Here is the official reply from from the White House:

http://www.upi.com/blog/2013/01/10/Piers-Morgan-deportation-petition-White-House-responds/7141357830406/

[fabiodriven]

Piers, you've dropped the ball yet again...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfZfJubbWik

[200xman]

Ruger set up a letter on their website about gun laws. It takes about 15 seconds to fill in the info and it automatically emails the President, VP and the rest of your elected officials. Here's The link.

http://www.ruger.com/micros/advocacy/takeAction.html