HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Gun lovers are just going...

Fri Jul 8, 2016, 10:50 PM

 

Gun lovers are just going to have to give up assault rifles.

There is no justifiable reason for them to be on the street and accessible at all. Hobby, fetish and tradition are not worth the risk to our society. M

And don't even start the pedantic definition debate. I don't give a goddamn what you call it. Don't even start, that has precluded reform far too long.

Any weapon capable killing an office party before any can get out, of spraying 100 LGBT folks celebrating pride in a safe place, capable of overpowering a police force and picking off 5 and hitting 11 does not belong in the arms of any citizen. No matter how well adjusted, clean or quiet.

We are a grown up society, a country capable of changing. Change isn't always comfortable. But, just as the people got on board or got left behind thoughout the civil rights movement, women's movement and the marriage equally movement, among so many others, the people are ready. We've had enough.

Gun reform is a civil rights movement. It is a social movement. Those movements always move forward, even with set backs. Get on board.

432 replies, 43184 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 432 replies Author Time Post
Reply Gun lovers are just going to have to give up assault rifles. (Original post)
morningfog Jul 2016 OP
doc03 Jul 2016 #1
morningfog Jul 2016 #2
calimary Jul 2016 #37
RazBerryBeret Jul 2016 #339
pipoman Jul 2016 #338
villager Jul 2016 #156
SpookyDem Jul 2016 #3
Jerry442 Jul 2016 #6
SpookyDem Jul 2016 #27
Jerry442 Jul 2016 #65
michreject Jul 2016 #106
MohRokTah Jul 2016 #264
Name removed Jul 2016 #30
3Stones Jul 2016 #19
SpookyDem Jul 2016 #25
MirrorAshes Jul 2016 #31
SpookyDem Jul 2016 #34
MirrorAshes Jul 2016 #57
Adrahil Jul 2016 #90
MirrorAshes Jul 2016 #103
TeddyR Jul 2016 #116
MirrorAshes Jul 2016 #131
TeddyR Jul 2016 #134
MirrorAshes Jul 2016 #138
TeddyR Jul 2016 #141
Scruffy1 Jul 2016 #159
sir pball Jul 2016 #394
MirrorAshes Jul 2016 #397
trueblue2007 Jul 2016 #244
MohRokTah Jul 2016 #266
MyNameGoesHere Jul 2016 #375
MohRokTah Jul 2016 #376
MyNameGoesHere Jul 2016 #377
Adrahil Jul 2016 #118
MirrorAshes Jul 2016 #132
Marengo Jul 2016 #157
MirrorAshes Jul 2016 #168
Marengo Jul 2016 #169
MirrorAshes Jul 2016 #271
Marengo Jul 2016 #407
Adrahil Jul 2016 #269
SheriffBob Jul 2016 #162
MohRokTah Jul 2016 #267
jack_krass Jul 2016 #336
michreject Jul 2016 #108
KeepItReal Jul 2016 #127
SpookyDem Jul 2016 #354
sir pball Jul 2016 #390
beevul Jul 2016 #41
MirrorAshes Jul 2016 #54
Adrahil Jul 2016 #93
MirrorAshes Jul 2016 #98
Adrahil Jul 2016 #120
jmg257 Jul 2016 #363
MillennialDem Jul 2016 #104
Adrahil Jul 2016 #124
smirkymonkey Jul 2016 #146
beevul Jul 2016 #170
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #179
ileus Jul 2016 #381
sir pball Jul 2016 #393
liberal N proud Jul 2016 #128
SheriffBob Jul 2016 #163
melm00se Jul 2016 #180
liberal N proud Jul 2016 #194
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #185
liberal N proud Jul 2016 #187
beevul Jul 2016 #199
oneshooter Jul 2016 #258
mythology Jul 2016 #344
oneshooter Jul 2016 #346
sir pball Jul 2016 #391
Marengo Jul 2016 #341
SheriffBob Jul 2016 #383
oneshooter Jul 2016 #384
Marengo Jul 2016 #387
SheriffBob Jul 2016 #412
Barack_America Jul 2016 #4
calimary Jul 2016 #38
DemonGoddess Jul 2016 #69
Amishman Jul 2016 #88
TeddyR Jul 2016 #117
SCantiGOP Jul 2016 #126
TeddyR Jul 2016 #130
EL34x4 Jul 2016 #151
beevul Jul 2016 #171
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #188
pipoman Jul 2016 #343
Igel Jul 2016 #147
Scruffy1 Jul 2016 #158
pipoman Jul 2016 #345
Marengo Jul 2016 #404
jmg257 Jul 2016 #123
SheriffBob Jul 2016 #164
Motley13 Jul 2016 #5
B Calm Jul 2016 #56
KingCharlemagne Jul 2016 #80
B Calm Jul 2016 #83
KingCharlemagne Jul 2016 #91
Kang Colby Jul 2016 #112
KingCharlemagne Jul 2016 #114
Kang Colby Jul 2016 #119
former9thward Jul 2016 #177
Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #193
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #191
pipoman Jul 2016 #347
MohRokTah Jul 2016 #270
Squinch Jul 2016 #7
SwankyXomb Jul 2016 #23
TeddyR Jul 2016 #122
jack_krass Jul 2016 #356
jmg257 Jul 2016 #8
cherokeeprogressive Jul 2016 #32
MohRokTah Jul 2016 #337
alcibiades_mystery Jul 2016 #9
Jerry442 Jul 2016 #66
KingCharlemagne Jul 2016 #81
Jerry442 Jul 2016 #85
KingCharlemagne Jul 2016 #89
Jerry442 Jul 2016 #92
appal_jack Jul 2016 #10
morningfog Jul 2016 #11
appal_jack Jul 2016 #12
morningfog Jul 2016 #14
G_j Jul 2016 #18
IL Lib Jul 2016 #22
AntiBank Jul 2016 #47
appal_jack Jul 2016 #111
G_j Jul 2016 #136
appal_jack Jul 2016 #150
sir pball Jul 2016 #392
G_j Jul 2016 #398
beevul Jul 2016 #399
jmg257 Jul 2016 #401
G_j Jul 2016 #402
jmg257 Jul 2016 #403
hack89 Jul 2016 #409
sarisataka Jul 2016 #13
morningfog Jul 2016 #15
sarisataka Jul 2016 #16
AntiBank Jul 2016 #48
cherokeeprogressive Jul 2016 #33
beevul Jul 2016 #172
Marr Jul 2016 #28
cherokeeprogressive Jul 2016 #35
beevul Jul 2016 #42
Marr Jul 2016 #144
beevul Jul 2016 #173
Marr Jul 2016 #182
beevul Jul 2016 #189
Marr Jul 2016 #192
beevul Jul 2016 #198
Marr Jul 2016 #272
beevul Jul 2016 #291
Marr Jul 2016 #302
beevul Jul 2016 #306
Marr Jul 2016 #307
beevul Jul 2016 #308
Marr Jul 2016 #357
beevul Jul 2016 #367
AntiBank Jul 2016 #50
Marr Jul 2016 #184
AntiBank Jul 2016 #252
Marr Jul 2016 #305
AntiBank Jul 2016 #311
Marr Jul 2016 #355
AntiBank Jul 2016 #359
Marr Jul 2016 #362
beevul Jul 2016 #364
Marr Jul 2016 #368
beevul Jul 2016 #370
Marr Jul 2016 #371
beevul Jul 2016 #374
Marr Jul 2016 #379
Marengo Jul 2016 #366
Marr Jul 2016 #369
Marengo Jul 2016 #373
Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #203
Marr Jul 2016 #234
Marr Jul 2016 #358
beevul Jul 2016 #365
Straw Man Jul 2016 #372
SheilaT Jul 2016 #17
rusty quoin Jul 2016 #20
beevul Jul 2016 #43
KeepItReal Jul 2016 #133
beevul Jul 2016 #176
virginia mountainman Jul 2016 #46
Recursion Jul 2016 #71
MirrorAshes Jul 2016 #73
Recursion Jul 2016 #75
MirrorAshes Jul 2016 #77
Recursion Jul 2016 #84
MirrorAshes Jul 2016 #100
TeddyR Jul 2016 #125
MirrorAshes Jul 2016 #135
TeddyR Jul 2016 #140
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #197
Recursion Jul 2016 #137
MirrorAshes Jul 2016 #145
Recursion Jul 2016 #148
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #202
Matrosov Jul 2016 #153
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #205
Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #211
Hoyt Jul 2016 #109
Recursion Jul 2016 #139
Hoyt Jul 2016 #143
Recursion Jul 2016 #149
Hoyt Jul 2016 #154
Recursion Jul 2016 #155
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #207
beevul Jul 2016 #212
Hoyt Jul 2016 #222
beevul Jul 2016 #225
Hoyt Jul 2016 #226
beevul Jul 2016 #230
Hoyt Jul 2016 #236
beevul Jul 2016 #241
Hoyt Jul 2016 #242
beevul Jul 2016 #246
SuperDutyTX Jul 2016 #21
Aristus Jul 2016 #24
Name removed Jul 2016 #26
Waldorf Jul 2016 #29
sir pball Jul 2016 #36
underahedgerow Jul 2016 #39
sir pball Jul 2016 #40
underahedgerow Jul 2016 #95
TeddyR Jul 2016 #129
Statistical Jul 2016 #190
underahedgerow Jul 2016 #196
oneshooter Jul 2016 #260
underahedgerow Jul 2016 #273
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #210
beevul Jul 2016 #44
virginia mountainman Jul 2016 #49
Adrahil Jul 2016 #94
Recursion Jul 2016 #72
Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #216
sir pball Jul 2016 #389
virginia mountainman Jul 2016 #45
Hoyt Jul 2016 #86
beevul Jul 2016 #201
MillennialDem Jul 2016 #99
virginia mountainman Jul 2016 #281
MillennialDem Jul 2016 #303
virginia mountainman Jul 2016 #313
MillennialDem Jul 2016 #314
oneshooter Jul 2016 #315
MillennialDem Jul 2016 #324
OccupyPA Jul 2016 #51
JonathanRackham Jul 2016 #52
michreject Jul 2016 #113
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #213
JonathanRackham Jul 2016 #231
Post removed Jul 2016 #53
baldguy Jul 2016 #55
Recursion Jul 2016 #70
jmg257 Jul 2016 #110
oneshooter Jul 2016 #284
FXSTD Jul 2016 #58
GaYellowDawg Jul 2016 #348
beevul Jul 2016 #349
GaYellowDawg Jul 2016 #350
beevul Jul 2016 #351
SheriffBob Jul 2016 #420
romanic Jul 2016 #59
morningfog Jul 2016 #60
romanic Jul 2016 #61
morningfog Jul 2016 #62
romanic Jul 2016 #64
morningfog Jul 2016 #96
appal_jack Jul 2016 #115
morningfog Jul 2016 #142
appal_jack Jul 2016 #152
morningfog Jul 2016 #160
MirrorAshes Jul 2016 #79
hack89 Jul 2016 #165
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #214
morningfog Jul 2016 #249
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #253
morningfog Jul 2016 #277
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #279
morningfog Jul 2016 #293
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #296
oneshooter Jul 2016 #285
morningfog Jul 2016 #292
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #297
oneshooter Jul 2016 #261
SheriffBob Jul 2016 #421
Captain Stern Jul 2016 #63
aikoaiko Jul 2016 #67
MohRokTah Jul 2016 #178
beevul Jul 2016 #206
aikoaiko Jul 2016 #209
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #255
greymattermom Jul 2016 #68
Hoyt Jul 2016 #87
Hoyt Jul 2016 #102
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #217
virginia mountainman Jul 2016 #382
Vinca Jul 2016 #74
Recursion Jul 2016 #76
Vinca Jul 2016 #78
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #219
Matrosov Jul 2016 #82
hack89 Jul 2016 #97
MillennialDem Jul 2016 #101
mainstreetonce Jul 2016 #105
Statistical Jul 2016 #200
mainstreetonce Jul 2016 #208
Hoyt Jul 2016 #107
hack89 Jul 2016 #167
MohRokTah Jul 2016 #195
Hoyt Jul 2016 #218
hack89 Jul 2016 #220
virginia mountainman Jul 2016 #386
MohRokTah Jul 2016 #183
Hoyt Jul 2016 #215
beevul Jul 2016 #239
Hoyt Jul 2016 #240
beevul Jul 2016 #243
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #221
Kang Colby Jul 2016 #121
Name removed Jul 2016 #161
Rex Jul 2016 #166
Motley13 Jul 2016 #174
MohRokTah Jul 2016 #175
Hoyt Jul 2016 #224
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #233
Hoyt Jul 2016 #238
beevul Jul 2016 #247
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #256
MohRokTah Jul 2016 #254
MohRokTah Jul 2016 #251
Waldorf Jul 2016 #274
Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #181
sofa king Jul 2016 #186
LongtimeAZDem Jul 2016 #204
sofa king Jul 2016 #223
LongtimeAZDem Jul 2016 #265
SuperDutyTX Jul 2016 #245
morningfog Jul 2016 #248
sofa king Jul 2016 #257
MohRokTah Jul 2016 #259
morningfog Jul 2016 #275
oneshooter Jul 2016 #262
LongtimeAZDem Jul 2016 #268
morningfog Jul 2016 #276
oneshooter Jul 2016 #282
DonP Jul 2016 #405
Post removed Jul 2016 #395
morningfog Jul 2016 #396
maveric56 Jul 2016 #227
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #235
MohRokTah Jul 2016 #340
Angel Martin Jul 2016 #228
Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #229
napi21 Jul 2016 #232
beevul Jul 2016 #424
trueblue2007 Jul 2016 #237
bluestateguy Jul 2016 #250
DustyJoe Jul 2016 #263
morningfog Jul 2016 #278
oneshooter Jul 2016 #286
SuperDutyTX Jul 2016 #287
morningfog Jul 2016 #294
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #298
morningfog Jul 2016 #301
SuperDutyTX Jul 2016 #304
morningfog Jul 2016 #310
SuperDutyTX Jul 2016 #312
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #321
SuperDutyTX Jul 2016 #330
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #320
LongtimeAZDem Jul 2016 #288
GoneOffShore Jul 2016 #280
Waldorf Jul 2016 #290
GoneOffShore Jul 2016 #316
GoneOffShore Jul 2016 #318
TeddyR Jul 2016 #326
GoneOffShore Jul 2016 #329
SuperDutyTX Jul 2016 #335
jmg257 Jul 2016 #328
morningfog Jul 2016 #295
GoneOffShore Jul 2016 #317
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #300
GoneOffShore Jul 2016 #319
TeddyR Jul 2016 #325
GoneOffShore Jul 2016 #327
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #331
TeddyR Jul 2016 #333
SwankyXomb Jul 2016 #342
Purveyor Jul 2016 #283
deathrind Jul 2016 #289
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #299
TeddyR Jul 2016 #332
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #334
discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #309
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #323
Name removed Jul 2016 #322
MadDAsHell Jul 2016 #352
WillowTree Jul 2016 #353
R.A. Ganoush Jul 2016 #378
Abq_Sarah Jul 2016 #360
tirebiter Jul 2016 #361
ileus Jul 2016 #380
SheriffBob Jul 2016 #385
dilby Jul 2016 #388
jmg257 Jul 2016 #400
LongtimeAZDem Jul 2016 #411
NaturalHigh Jul 2016 #406
morningfog Jul 2016 #410
SheriffBob Jul 2016 #413
Wayburn Jul 2016 #408
virginia mountainman Jul 2016 #414
morningfog Jul 2016 #415
virginia mountainman Jul 2016 #416
morningfog Jul 2016 #417
virginia mountainman Jul 2016 #418
morningfog Jul 2016 #419
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply ?
virginia mountainman Jul 2016 #422
morningfog Jul 2016 #423
virginia mountainman Jul 2016 #426
Jim Beard Jul 2016 #427
beevul Jul 2016 #425
ileus Jul 2016 #428
morningfog Jul 2016 #429
SheriffBob Jul 2016 #430
Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #431
Albertoo Jul 2016 #432

Response to morningfog (Original post)

Fri Jul 8, 2016, 10:59 PM

1. Good luck with that, we can't even get agreement on DU n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #1)

Fri Jul 8, 2016, 11:01 PM

2. DU has a few vocal gun fetishists.

 

Hillary, Dem House and Dem Senate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #2)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:22 AM

37. Well I happen to agree with you, morningfog.

You'll get all kinds of excuses and rationales and other crap about why somebody needs and just simply HAS TO have a massacre machine. Their problems just simply MUST become a problem for all the rest of us, I guess. Nobody can tell me there's a reason on earth why, that will ever make any sense to me. And Heaven knows they've certainly tried!

And their whole canard about the so-called "good guy with a gun" - hell, Dallas police were the absolute poster children of that, in the madness that erupted there, and look how nicely that all worked out. I'm fed up being held hostage to the 2nd Amendment. And no one can tell me it simply mustn't ever be touched. Baloney. If they can futz around with the 15th Amendment, there's no reason on earth why the 2nd Amendment must absolutely be immune to a few nips and tucks, and much-needed modernization, too. The 2nd Amendment desperately needs further amending. If we have ANY hope of reducing further carnage, that is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to calimary (Reply #37)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:53 PM

339. totally agree

with your post.

I don't understand the huge need to own semi automatic weapons. But I call those people ammo-sexuals. I know a few of them, a couple of my in-laws, actually.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #2)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:51 PM

338. No, I have been here over 10 years

 

Every year or less there is a "repeal/rewrite the 2nd amendment" poll in GD. There has never been a single poll on this topic that is even close...always 4 to 1 against any such action....and that is on DU....society in general is even less likely.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #1)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 12:02 PM

156. There were Democrats who didn't want, or believe in, civil rights in the 60's, too.

 

Yet it still finally happened.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Original post)

Fri Jul 8, 2016, 11:17 PM

3. Its a modern sporting rifle

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpookyDem (Reply #3)

Fri Jul 8, 2016, 11:44 PM

6. Which bears an amazing resemblance to weapons first designed by the Nazis. NT

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jerry442 (Reply #6)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:06 AM

27. What modern gun are you comparing to which nazi rifle?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpookyDem (Reply #27)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 07:37 AM

65. How about this one.

Last edited Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:53 PM - Edit history (1)



The StG 44, an early German assault rifle, was adopted by the Wehrmacht in 1944.

-----------------------------------------------



Colt AR15A4

-----------------------------------------------

Yep, those Nazis knew how to build a good huntin' rifle.

(And yes, I know the AR-15 isn't full-auto. This is very significant to somebody.)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
On edit: a couple of respondents have pointed out that the first image is not in fact an StG 44 but is a replica. Apparently accidentally showing a picture of a replica of the StG 44 which was intentionally constructed to be nearly indistinguishable from the original has destroyed my entire argument. Here is a genuine picture, although for some reason you won't see it until you click on it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/StG_44#/media/File:MP44_-_Tyskland_-_8x33mm_Kurz_-_Arm%C3%A9museum.jpg

Here is a picture also appropriate to this discussion:




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jerry442 (Reply #65)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:58 AM

106. Top one is a 22 LR nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jerry442 (Reply #65)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 04:51 PM

264. The first one is NOT an StG 44

 

It's a cheap imitation of an StG44 that is actually a .22LR semi-automatic rifle. It is functionally the same as this:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jerry442 (Reply #6)


Response to SpookyDem (Reply #3)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 01:30 AM

19. Sporting rifle... What does that mean?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 3Stones (Reply #19)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:05 AM

25. For sportsing of course

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpookyDem (Reply #25)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:16 AM

31. Who the fuck uses an AR-15 for "sport"?

Even the pro-gun people I know who love them only take them to firing ranges, and that's not a god damned sport. They serve no purpose other than being exceptionally good tools for killing people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #31)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:37 AM

34. I use them for target shooting and coyote/pig hunting

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpookyDem (Reply #34)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 06:46 AM

57. And you need an AR-15 for that?

No, no you don't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #57)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:10 AM

90. What kind of fun should he use? NT

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #90)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:51 AM

103. Something that can't be used to murder dozens of people in minutes would be a start. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #103)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:29 AM

116. So no semi-auto handguns either?

 

That's what he Virginia Tech shooter used. Look, I think you have a right to keep and bear arms, but if you can get the political will to pass an "assault weapon" ban then great. But the weapon used in Dallas might not even qualify as an "assault weapon," so instead of using imprecise terms he controllers need to identify what function they want to ban, like high capacity detachable magazines.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TeddyR (Reply #116)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:51 AM

131. Personally, I want them all banned.

Im sorry if that will deprive people of their hobby. If that's the price we have to pay to end this madness, so be it.

I understand my position is extreme, and probably unrealistic. But I'm absolutely DONE enabling violence by attempting to adopt half-measures. Too much blood has been shed. No more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #131)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:56 AM

134. Look, I completely respect your opinion

 

Even if I disagree with it. Here's my issue with those calling for a ban. First, as you recognize it isn't feasible. Second, it gives groups like the NRA fodder for the argument "they want to take our guns"!!! And the related point is that basically makes any gun control much more difficult.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TeddyR (Reply #134)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:02 AM

138. I appreciate the civil discussion, truly

And I am certainly arguing from a place of emotion.

But I do want to take the guns. And if enough people start saying it, loudly and without fear of the NRA, we might actually start to break the strangle-hold they have on this country.

Again, thanks for the discussion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #138)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:07 AM

141. Thank you

 

And you may be right. If you TRULY want to stop or lower the rate of mass shootings then a firearm ban is the only way to do so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #138)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 12:35 PM

159. This is exactly what we need.

The time for half measures has long passed. It's my right not to be shot by crazies with guns. They are always talking about rights.
I can't see where the rights of a gun nut trump the rights of the eight year old girl who was killed by a stray bullet about a mile from my house or the guy who was murdered for his cell phone a block away from here. I think the assault weapons ban is ludicrous and will not accomplish anything. But if enough people start to see the light we could get a change in attitude. The proposed legislation is only a feel good sop.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #138)

Mon Jul 11, 2016, 01:19 AM

394. Do you want to stop mass shootings, or the quotidian gun violence?

I'm breaking in because, with civility and respect, I'm far more interested in reining in the 7,000+ handgun deaths a year before we worry about the 500 or so mass shooting deaths a year - in 2014 rifles of all kinds killed about 250 people while handguns killed about 14 times as many people.

I do understand that mass shootings are far, far more visible and emotionally challenging, but there is, at best, limited political capital for gun control in America - it might be possible to ban the sale of semiauto rifles (I don't think a buyback would be possible), but that would pretty much be the end of gun control for years. The way an AWB addon has poisoned other gun control bills in the last decade should evidence that. I favor a differently targeted, broader package that I also suspect would be much easier to pass with less blowback, and would have ten times the impact on American gun violence as even an immediate, fully effective, confiscatory ban of "assault weapons":

I believe in a nationwide, mandatory ownership license, with safety and responsibility training.
I believe in mandatory dealer transfers, where not only is a background check performed, but a record of the sale is made.
I believe in a "title", much like a car, where the duly legal owner of the firearm is documented, and it must be passed to the next owner, with record of transaction. Possessed by the owner, but severe penalties for not having it.
I believe in severe, mandatory, criminal charges for gun crime, including failure to secure your gun properly.
I believe in handgun registration.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Reply #394)

Mon Jul 11, 2016, 09:37 AM

397. I want to do both.

They are not mutually exclusive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #131)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:48 PM

244. i totally agree with you. I'm absolutely DONE enabling violence

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #131)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 05:01 PM

266. Here's how you accomplish that.

 

1) Write up an amendment to the constitution. Basically, all it needs to say is this:


Section 1. The second article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.

Section 2. The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of firearms, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.

Section 3. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by conventions in the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress.


2) Convince 290 members of the House of Representatives that amendment should be passed.

3) Convince 67 members of the Senate that amendment should be passed.

3.5) Barring being capable of both 2) and 3), convince 34 state legislatures to pass identical legislation calling for an Article V Constitutional Convention for the purposes of considering that amendment, then have 26 voting delegations vote to pass it.

4) Upon completion of 2) & 3) OR 3.5), convince 38 state legislatures to ratify that amendment.

5) Then just get all 50 states to make all firearms illegal.

Best get started right away and good luck!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #266)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 01:16 PM

375. The amendment is silly in today's real world

The idea that the people will stand up to a tyrannical national government that possesses the means to extinct cities is laughable. The original intent was to fight a standing army of the National government with flintlock muskets. But hey if you belive your little pop guns can stand up to tactical bombers and nukes, then by all means live in that wolverine fantasy world. It's a stupid amendment written by some very drunk people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MyNameGoesHere (Reply #375)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 01:26 PM

376. No, you don't understand the opriginal intent at all.

 

The original intent was to have a militia of individuals ready to defend the nation against enemies. So long as all people had the right to be armed, we would have the means of national defense.

It was NEVER intended to prove the people with the means to overthrow the government that guaranteed such rights. In fact, every attempt to do so has been crushed, starting with the Whiskey Rebellion during the Washington Administration.

Regardless, the only way to ban all guns is to amend the constitution. There is no other way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #376)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 01:42 PM

377. Sorry your opinion

is different than mine, but that is once again the silliness of the this amendment. It is written in a fools language, most likely by drunken founders as they were known to do at the time. And besides when you rewrote my words to fit your narrative, you kind of lost. I said to protect against a tyrannical national threat.
Some people disagree with your opinion

“The Second Amendment was a response to concerns raised during the ratification of the Constitution that the power of Congress to disarm the state militias and create a national standing army posed an intolerable threat to the sovereignty of the several states,” then-Justice John Paul Stevens correctly noted in his minority opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #103)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:32 AM

118. Hard to write that into a law.

 

And could be dangerous. Wild pigs, for example, can be very dangerous if you miss your shot or only wound the pig. Sometimes a rapid follow up shot or three is necessary.

But in any case, you need to be specific. Are semi-autos with a fixed magazine acceptable to you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #118)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:53 AM

132. None of these killing machines are acceptable.

No more tip-toeing around the issue just to protect an outdated tradition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #132)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 12:17 PM

157. Not even for hunters?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marengo (Reply #157)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 01:32 PM

168. Hunters can find a new hobby.

Why should we sacrifice our lives rather than they sacrifice their fun? Where are our priorities?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #168)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 01:57 PM

169. Ah, the voice of ignorance. But, please continue to roll with that "hobby" nonsense...

 

You'll be sure to realize your goal in no time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marengo (Reply #169)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 05:14 PM

271. Ahh, the voice of an enabler.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #271)

Mon Jul 11, 2016, 03:10 PM

407. Do you believe all hunting is for sport?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #168)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 05:06 PM

269. What's your plan for....

 

Managing wildlife populations?

Abandoning hunting would be a disaster.

And for many, hunting is not just a hobby, but a major food source.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #118)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 01:10 PM

162. Sound's like "Bungalow Bill"

Beatles. "Hey Bungalow Bill, who did you kill?"
"It could have been us instead of him"

Oink, Oink.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #118)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 05:04 PM

267. Difficult but not impossible. See post #266 for a detailed step by step how to guide. eom

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #103)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:47 PM

336. Any gun can be used to murder dozens of people, or even a knife or bomb

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #57)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:00 AM

108. Not based on need

I use mine for 3 gun competition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpookyDem (Reply #34)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:47 AM

127. So it is a toy to you and could be replaced with a shotgun for hunting

You don't NEED an an Assault Rifle derived weapon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KeepItReal (Reply #127)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 01:01 AM

354. you could but shotguns are not practical, for this range/type of hunting

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KeepItReal (Reply #127)

Mon Jul 11, 2016, 12:57 AM

390. Nope. I use an actual military-issue sniper rifle for hunting.

OK, so it isn't a genuine Remington Defense M24 Sniper Weapons System (available to the public!), it's just identical - a Remington Model 700 in 300 Winchester Magnum with a heavy barrel and adjustable stock, fitted with a bipod and adjustable scope. Well, the scope is better, so I guess it isn't the exact same...but it's still as innocuous a rifle as you could hope for, perfectly legal even in the UK. If this assface in Dallas had it, everybody he shot would be dead, and yet nobody's howling to ban it, yet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #31)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:48 AM

41. The majority of those who own them.

 

Who the fuck uses an AR-15 for "sport"?


The majority of those who own them.

Even the pro-gun people I know who love them only take them to firing ranges, and that's not a god damned sport.


That's simply your opinion, and an ignorant one at that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beevul (Reply #41)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 06:38 AM

54. Ignorance you say?

Ignorance is pretending these guns have any place in a civilized society. You are part of the problem.

Why not just admit firing a big gun makes you feel good? That's their only purpose, and it's not a good enough one to justify their existence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #54)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:14 AM

93. Well....

 

How many people die each year from Alcohol-related causes?

What exactly is the purpose of alcohol?

Personal pleasure. And most people don't drive drunk, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #93)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:43 AM

98. What a lovely straw-man.

Drunk drivers are routinely punished in this country and are not considered remotely socially acceptable. They are vilified, and rightly so.

Gun violence, on the other hand, is "just something we have to live with" and gun-rights activists are seen as legitimate, even though guns are responsible for atrocities beyond imagination.

Apples and oranges.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #98)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:34 AM

120. Murder is illegal too.

 

Drinking is not illegal, and neither is owning a gun. It's the actual crime part that is illegal. But drinking facilitates drunk driving, the same way owning a gun faciliates gun violence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #98)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 10:26 AM

363. Haven't seen too many felonious gun violent perps get a pat on the back. They too are typically

vilified - and yes - rightly so.

They are something we have to effectively deal with, not live with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #93)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:53 AM

104. I don't get your point at all. Driving drunk is illegal, and other activities drunk

 

almost never hurt other people.

If being drunk made you like someone on PCP, you might have a point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MillennialDem (Reply #104)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:37 AM

124. Murdering someone is illegal too.

 

And other drunk acitvites almost never hurt anyone? Are you serious?

Bar fights, domestic violence, non-driving accidents while drunk, liver disease, fetal alcohol syndrome, young people killing themselves with alcohol poisoning, getting young people drunk to facilita rape? Those ring a bell at all?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #54)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:33 AM

146. Thank YOU!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #54)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:04 PM

170. No. Ignorance is believing that any majority share your opinion.

 

Ignorance is pretending these guns have any place in a civilized society. You are part of the problem.


No. Ignorance is believing that any majority share your opinion.

Why not just admit firing a big gun makes you feel good?


Uh...because it doesn't? It doesn't make me feel one way or the other.

That's their only purpose, and it's not a good enough one to justify their existence.


Again, this is your opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #31)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:22 PM

179. Target shooting is a sport

 

Even if you do not like it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #31)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 06:58 PM

381. 3 gun competition shooters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #31)

Mon Jul 11, 2016, 01:09 AM

393. The Germans, they LOVE the AR but hate our sloppy manufacturing.

Dead serious - it's a pretty popular target rifle in Germany (which oddly enough means the controls on it are looser than a hunting rifle); they adore them so much they manufacture them themselves. I'd love to have one, they're probably as well made as an HK.

http://www.schmeisser-germany.de/
http://www.hera-arms.com/
http://www.oberlandarms.com/produkte-infos-rifles-oa15-de-artkat=11-Selbstladeb%FCchsen+Rifles+OA+15.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 3Stones (Reply #19)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:48 AM

128. It seems the sport they refer to is...

Shooting people.

Like fish in a bowl.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal N proud (Reply #128)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 01:17 PM

163. Shooting guns is not a sport

It takes no athlete ability to pull a trigger.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheriffBob (Reply #163)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:22 PM

180. ahhhh the voice of ignorance

the ISSF recognizes up the 9 shooting disciplines in the summer Olympics and an additional 9 disciplines in the World Championships.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to melm00se (Reply #180)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:35 PM

194. Olympics also sees curling as a sport.

Siding a rock across ice. These organizations made shooting a sport because of lobbying from gun makers and gun enthusiasts.

If shooting was only restrained to these events, it wouldn’t be a problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheriffBob (Reply #163)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:26 PM

185. No it takes skill

 

To hit a small target, that is why it is an Olympic sport.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheriffBob (Reply #163)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:28 PM

187. You have to make sure that trigger finger is properly stretched

Don't want to pull a finger muscle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheriffBob (Reply #163)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:42 PM

199. Pulling a trigger doesn't mean you're going to hit anything.

 

Its a gun, not a guided missile.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheriffBob (Reply #163)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 04:37 PM

258. Me, my Loving Wife, and all three of our sons shoot HighPower.

Three position, timed at 200, 300, and 500 yards. No glass sights.

I shoot a National match grade M1Garand.308, Wife and kids shoot Military Match AR-15's.

I would challenge you to try it. Then repeat the ignorance you just wrote.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oneshooter (Reply #258)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:19 PM

344. The fact that something is hard doesn't make it a sport

 

It doesn't require any particular physical strength. Darts and pool aren't sports in my book either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mythology (Reply #344)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:28 PM

346. It requires more than "physical strength"

It requires physical control, mental alertness, and the ability to recover and repeat within the time limits.

Why don't you try it, before you put it down.

or are you afraid to try, and fail.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mythology (Reply #344)

Mon Jul 11, 2016, 12:59 AM

391. Is it a sport if it's in the Olympics? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheriffBob (Reply #163)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:12 PM

341. Who on earth should respect anything you have to say on this subject after that ignorant gem.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marengo (Reply #341)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 08:12 PM

383. flame

Ouch! Since when is somebody ignorant for expressing an opinion which you disagree with.

Video games require more skill than shooting a gun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheriffBob (Reply #383)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 08:16 PM

384. Then come on out to a match, and show us how easy it is.

Unless you are afraid to fail.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheriffBob (Reply #383)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 10:45 PM

387. LOL! It's rare to see a such a public display of profound ignorance on a subject. But...

 

Please do carry on, it's quite amusing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marengo (Reply #387)

Tue Jul 12, 2016, 05:12 PM

412. You are

hallucinating

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Original post)

Fri Jul 8, 2016, 11:20 PM

4. It's not the guns, even, it's the NRA.

As a nation, we have to turn our backs to them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Reply #4)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:22 AM

38. It's BOTH.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to calimary (Reply #38)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 07:57 AM

69. ^^^This!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Reply #4)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:04 AM

88. its not the NRA, it is the gun culture they represent

if the NRA ceased to exist tomorrow, their millions of rabid backers and the gun industry itself would just pick another gun group to rally behind. All you would change is the name on the donation checks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Amishman (Reply #88)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:31 AM

117. This is fairly accurate

 

Although the NRA only has about 5 million members. The anti-gun movement should be able to gather that many supporters you'd think but so far it hasn't happened, at least not in an organized way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TeddyR (Reply #117)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:46 AM

126. The NRA isn't about members

It has almost unlimited money - they are the marketing and lobbying arm of the US gun and ammo industry, posing as a citizen's advocacy group.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SCantiGOP (Reply #126)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:51 AM

130. I'm not familiar with their funding

 

But if the left was serious about gun control - truly serious - they could find the organization and funding. For example, pro-choice groups are very well funded and very organized, and those are largely left-leaning groups.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TeddyR (Reply #130)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:40 AM

151. It's not for lack of funding

 

Michael Bloomberg has tossed millions towards gun control causes and candidates with little to show for it.

Pro-choice and pro-gun organizations are actually very similar. Both groups are being asked to give up rights that they hold dear by people who offer nothing in return. Both see incremental laws as a slippery slope to total bans by an opposition who occasionally makes it clear that a total ban is in fact the end objective.

Finally, people who are against both gun control laws and anti-choice laws tend to make this issue of primary importance to them in the voting booth. For those who support increased gun control or limits on abortion, the issue is often near the bottom of stuff they care about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SCantiGOP (Reply #126)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:07 PM

171. Actually, that would be the NSSF. N/T

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SCantiGOP (Reply #126)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:28 PM

188. Bloomberg has more money than the NRA

 

Even his billions is not getting actual widespread support.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SCantiGOP (Reply #126)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:15 PM

343. Completely wrong

 

The revenue of all US gun makers combined....all...added....together...do not make a single fortune 500 company. The NRA has some 5 million members. The NRA's money is absolutely limited.

Far, far too many claims of the all-powerfulness of the NRA. The only power the NRA really has is, 'we will challenge that proposed law on grounds of constitutionality', and 'the people...voters...will not support that'....that's it...

The issue is that most every proposal for gun control are either asked and answered as being unconstitutional, or are obviously to any objective thinker to be constitutionally impossible...

Constitutional challenges will ensue any legislation with or without the NRA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Amishman (Reply #88)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:35 AM

147. The death toll due to "gun culture" is strange.

On the one hand it's redmeck whites that we point to as prototypical.

But most guns are owned by middle classers.

And an unreasonably large number of deaths are at the hands of African-Americans.

So "gun culture" is the same across those three groups--the privileged and least so, blacks and the most racist?

One culture, or easiest talking point that has problems with close examination?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Amishman (Reply #88)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 12:26 PM

158. Unfortunately, you are right.

A lifetime time of screen and television have created the glamour of the gun. The population is so inundated with this bullshit that it has become an act of faith that a guns fix things. From John Wayne, the draft dodger, to Dirty Harry to Rambo and lately Django. I am so glad I came from a military family. My grandfather had three Silver stars and never owned a gun in his life. My father served in two wars and liked to hunt birds. The good news is that the number of the households having guns has declined steadily over the years. The truth is that even for hunting, anything more than a single shot is unnecessary. With a shotgun by the time you get the barrel down and back on lead it's too late and in most deer hunting you really get one shot.. Even in open country, it's rare to get a second shot and if you do it's at a running target, which maybe one in a hundred could hit and they would have hit it the first time. The bolt action repeating rifle was just a hand me down from the military for when you are shooting at stuff that can shoot back. The repeating shotgun was aimed at market hunters not sportsmen. At the best it's just a convenient way to carry ammo. Some trap shooter like auto shotguns because of less recoil, but there are a lot of ways to reduce recoil.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scruffy1 (Reply #158)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:25 PM

345. The 2nd Amendment hasn't a thing to do with "need" or "hunting"....nothing

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scruffy1 (Reply #158)

Mon Jul 11, 2016, 02:22 PM

404. In which conflict(s) did your grandfather win 3 silver stars? What was the branch of service?

 

What was his terminal rank?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Reply #4)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:36 AM

123. Don't forget the 90-100 million gun owners. That's a whole bunch of people. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Reply #4)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 01:19 PM

164. disagree

We need to confront them and kick their ass.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Original post)

Fri Jul 8, 2016, 11:20 PM

5. Open carry is totally idiotic

how do the cops tell the good guy from the bad guy?
One guy in Dallas was open carrying & was mistakenly identified as the killer, he is lucky to be alive. His brother told him to give his gun/rifle to a cop, which he did. Glad someone in his family had a brain.
So what good does it do?

We must vote everyone out of office that does not support gun regulation!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Motley13 (Reply #5)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 06:44 AM

56. My son best friend is a concealed and carry person. I asked him why

 

he feels like he needs to carry a firearm. He said he was a county prosecutor that has sent a lot of bad people to jail. That said he made the point he has a lot of enemies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to B Calm (Reply #56)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 08:28 AM

80. His possession of a firearm makes him on average 8.5 times more

 

likely to be killed or wounded by a firearm. As a County DA, he should be smart enough to comprehend the well-established actuarial science.

Or maybe he harbors a secret death wish.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingCharlemagne (Reply #80)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 08:44 AM

83. When these two boys were growing up together I insisted they

 

took a gun safety course when they showed interests in deer hunting. The three of us went through the course together. My son grew up as very liberal with no love for guns. He was more interested in archery and even went bear hunting with a traditional bow.

His friend (the county prosecutor) grew up to be a staunch gun loving Republican, but I do know he is smart enough to safely use his gun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to B Calm (Reply #83)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:10 AM

91. Sorry to belabor the point. you can be the safest gun-owner in the history of the known universe and

 

it doesn't change the FACT that the mere possession of a firearm makes you 8.5 times more likely on average to be killed or wounded by discharge of a firearm.

IOW, his many "enemies" notwithstanding, your son's friend would be safer if he disposed of all firearms in his possession.

The actuarial statistics do not lie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingCharlemagne (Reply #91)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:22 AM

112. Cite your source, please.

The discredited Kellermann study concluded 2.7x more likely. Unfortunately, Kellermann counted a "gun in the home" as meaning a gun brought into the home for the sole purpose of killing the resident. Say if a neighbor brought a gun into the home of someone else to kill the home owner, that was counted as if the deceased home owner had a "gun in the home".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kang Colby (Reply #112)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:23 AM

114. nah, not going to get in a pissing match with gun humpers. - nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingCharlemagne (Reply #114)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:34 AM

119. I think people are starting to get it.

Gun control advocates use statistics like a drunk uses a street light....for support rather than lumination.

Gun control advocates also include suicides in their crooked definition of "gun violence" because 67% of gun related deaths are suicide. Just to inflate the numbers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingCharlemagne (Reply #114)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:18 PM

177. At least you admit what your statistics are composed of.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #177)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:34 PM

193. Heh-heh.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingCharlemagne (Reply #114)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:31 PM

191. At least you seem to admit

 

It was a made up number

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingCharlemagne (Reply #114)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:31 PM

347. You cite lies and pretend those who point it out are the problem....

 

Your 8.5 is complete hogshit....you know it is hogshit and stand by it anyway...don't expect lies to help your cause.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Motley13 (Reply #5)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 05:12 PM

270. Well, not totally idiotic.

 

Wyoming is an open carry state and you'll be hard pressed to go to any town or "city" in the state and find a single person openly carrying a firearm who is not a security guard or a member of law enforcement.

But having worked on a ranch as a boy I would not want to go out checking fences and not have a firearm strapped to my hip because of the potential for an encounter with deadly wildlife, which has happened to me when I was 14 in the form of a rabid coyote. The .38 S&W I had in my holster on my hip that day probably saved me from an agonizing medical treatment at the very least. Had it not been legal for me to open carry, I would have been in a world of hurt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Original post)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 12:07 AM

7. The humpers are going to swarm this, but of course you are right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Squinch (Reply #7)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 01:43 AM

23. If you put them all on ignore, it makes things almost tolerable.

40+ at this moment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SwankyXomb (Reply #23)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:35 AM

122. One reason that nothing gets done in this country

 

Is because we put people "on ignore" and huddle up in our safe spaces only with those whom we agree with, unwilling to learn or discuss compromise. The Atlantic had a pretty good article on this issue recently. And it isn't like folks here are ignoring Ted Nugent on the gun issue, but instead are ignoring other Dems who might actually be willing to compromise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SwankyXomb (Reply #23)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 01:10 AM

356. Add me

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Original post)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 12:09 AM

8. How about rifles with 10 round fixed mags, like the SKS? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jmg257 (Reply #8)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:30 AM

32. I have a Savage Arms .22 Semi-auto with a 10 round mag. Assault rifle?

 

It's a large enough caliber to kill a squirrel if you're a good aim.

Assault weapon? Jerry Brown says it is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cherokeeprogressive (Reply #32)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:49 PM

337. .22 caliber firearms kill a lot of people annually.

 

Rimfire ammunition can still be deadly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Original post)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 12:12 AM

9. But then how would they resist a tyrannical government / kill cops? ...I mean...er...Constitution!

 

Something something!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #9)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 07:44 AM

66. Yeah, ask them who exactly they plan to shoot and when?

It seems to have gone completely off their radar that Hitler, for example, was elected.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jerry442 (Reply #66)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 08:31 AM

81. Technical Note: Hitler was "appointed," not "elected." The Nazi Party

 

never received a majority in any free and fair election.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingCharlemagne (Reply #81)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 08:48 AM

85. Fair point.

Still, it was electoral processes that got him into position to assume dictatorial powers. The actual reality is quite complicated. One could study it for a lifetime.

One thing's for sure -- the vision that some have that Hitler seized power riding into Berlin on a tank is not even remotely correct.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jerry442 (Reply #85)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:05 AM

89. Van Papen and the conservatives around Hindenburg thought they could "control".and

 

"coopt" Hitler if they brought him into the government, much the same way I imagine Republican power brokers imagine they will control Trump.

with a nuclear arsenal of 8,500 warheads, Trump is arguably more dangerous than Hitler.

All leftists must hope for the best but plan for the worst. I am.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingCharlemagne (Reply #89)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:11 AM

92. {Sigh} Remember when "Godwin's Law" was an obscure Internet meme? NT

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Original post)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 12:48 AM

10. Right, because people willing to murder never do anything illegal.

 

Mexican Cartels would never supply murderous fucks with illegal weaponry, would they? It's not like they have experience moving illegal goods and human beings across the US border, right?

Of course, every police department in America has semi-auto M-4 type carbines in their patrol cars. Plus, many are getting DRMO'd full-auto M-16's from Homeland Security. Is that a concern? Or is it only regular citizens we need to worry about?

But yeah, sure, another ill-conceived Assault Weapons Ban will do worlds of good.



-app

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to appal_jack (Reply #10)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 12:57 AM

11. Why not make it harder for the murderous fucks, as you say?

 

Are you worried about the police and HS weapons? Do you think your weapons will protect you from theirs?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #11)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 01:11 AM

12. No & no at present.

 

I try not to worry about police at all. I interacted with a few officers today during the aftermath of a big storm down this way, and they were courteous, professional, and helpful. I appreciate that, and their important work helping to keep citizens safe around downed power lines, etc.

My own semi-auto weapons are for protection against home invasion, as police are usually >25 minutes away from me. That's a long response time if something bad were to happen.

If police departments can own full-auto guns and exploding robot drones, etc., then why can't an American own a simple semi-auto rifle? Police and non-police are both just regular, civilian citizens...

Banning citizens from owning semi-auto rifles will not necessarily make it harder for the murderous fucks...

-app

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to appal_jack (Reply #12)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 01:14 AM

14. Of course it would make it harder.

 

There is always a cost when something is illegal. The criminal business cost is not insignificant.

I'll worry about the cop's weapons after we deal with the gun nuts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to appal_jack (Reply #12)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 01:28 AM

18. Jesus...

how did people become such cowards? You'd think ISIS was about to personally invade your house.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to G_j (Reply #18)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 01:34 AM

22. +1 n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to G_j (Reply #18)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 04:19 AM

47. remember this?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to G_j (Reply #18)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:15 AM

111. Yes, fire extinguishers are for cowards too.

 

I mean, the odds of dying in a fire are infinitesimal. Still "cowards" like me make sure there are a few in the house.



-app

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to appal_jack (Reply #111)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:59 AM

136. Maybe more like having a hook and ladder truck

parked in your driveway.
"My own semi-auto weapons are for protection against home invasion"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to G_j (Reply #136)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:39 AM

150. If it needs to be parked in the drive way, it's a howitzer, not a handgun.

 

Howitzers and their shells are tightly regulated by the NFA as "destructive devices," in case you did not know. I feel no need to own one, nor would my bank account permit me to do so.

A semi-auto hand gun is rather like a fire extinguisher in that it is small, individually-deployed, and generally only powerful for moderate defensive purposes. One won't stop an already-full blaze with a fire extinguisher, nor are the odds good to face-off an entire gang with a single handgun.

-app

-app

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to G_j (Reply #18)

Mon Jul 11, 2016, 01:03 AM

392. I had to call emergency services once in Maine..

..medical, not criminal, but the first responder on scene was a Skowhegan cop (Skow was actually closer to us than Fairfield where we technically lived).

Showed up twelve minutes after the 911 call. I guess you can call me a coward if you wish, but I'd rather not wait 12 minutes with somebody of unknown intentions in my home.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Reply #392)

Mon Jul 11, 2016, 01:39 PM

398. I was referring to the imagined "need"

to have semi automatic weapons. People watch too much TV me thinks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to G_j (Reply #398)

Mon Jul 11, 2016, 01:54 PM

399. The only imagined 'need', is the 'need' to ban them. N/T

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to G_j (Reply #398)

Mon Jul 11, 2016, 02:07 PM

401. If you are going to go through the steps to arm yourself, especially for defense,

why would you want to pick what likley may be considered an inferior choice?

I.E. Why would you want to settle, say, for 6 rounds of .38 when you could have 8 rounds of .45, or 16 rounds of 9mm?

Doesn't make much sense, if the choice is there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jmg257 (Reply #401)

Mon Jul 11, 2016, 02:13 PM

402. a lot of sane people

state that a shot gun is plenty sufficient for home protection, unless of course you think a Colombian drug cartel, jackbooted government thugs or ISIS is coming after you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to G_j (Reply #402)

Mon Jul 11, 2016, 02:17 PM

403. Sure....and it makes some sense - for home protection - for some. Of course they have semi-auto

shotguns too, that are quite popular. Wouldn't necessarily want to choose a 28" over/under.

Overall, I think I'd still prefer the handgun, but don't get all worked up over it.

Hmm...a small pistol-caliber carbine like the Beretta Storm could be ideal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to G_j (Reply #402)

Mon Jul 11, 2016, 03:19 PM

409. Sure - if you are a good shot

because you won't have that many rounds to play around with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #11)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 01:12 AM

13. "Are you worried about the police and HS weapons?"

Seriously?

Do you remember why there was a protest in Dallas in the first place?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings-2016/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarisataka (Reply #13)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 01:15 AM

15. Yes. Two black men had guns and white cops freaked out

 

and killed them for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #15)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 01:22 AM

16. So if black men don't want to worry about police

they shouldn't have guns. Well why didn't anyone think of that before. Police won't kill an unarmed black man...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to morningfog (Reply #11)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:36 AM

33. We have what amounts to an open border to the south.

 

Ban whatever the fuck you want.

Then travel to CA, AZ, NM, and TX, and buy it all day and twice on Sunday.

Hello.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #11)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:10 PM

172. The thing is, you DON'T make it harder for the murderous fucks...

 

You just make it harder for everyone else that obeys.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to appal_jack (Reply #10)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:08 AM

28. If guns were illegal, they'd be very, very expensive.

 

Not many violent losers have got $20k to spend on an illegal weapon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #28)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:38 AM

35. Market science says that makes the price go down rather than disappear.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #28)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:50 AM

42. Just like cocaine pot and heroine, right? N/T

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beevul (Reply #42)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:14 AM

144. Exactly like that, yeah-- they're expensive.

 

When drugs are legalized, the prices drop precipitously.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #144)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:12 PM

173. Our survey says: Bzzt.

 

See Colorado.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beevul (Reply #173)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:25 PM

182. This says you're wrong:

 

http://www.ibtimes.com.au/cost-illegal-firearms-australia-has-skyrocketed-criminals-now-do-gun-sharing-1378871

And guns are nothing like pot. Put severe penalties on gun possession, and it will be very expensive to get a gun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #182)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:29 PM

189. So you want a war on guns, just like the war on drugs.

 

Would you like to guess how well that would work out?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beevul (Reply #189)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:33 PM

192. I'm glad you admit prices on guns would go up, at least.

 

That nonsense about prices dropping when items become harder to get is just absurd.

But I have to say, your fallback position is equally nonsensical. We can't have harsher gun laws because... there would be violence? What do you think we have now? Have you taken a look at a US newspaper lately? Ever heard of a place called Australia? Compare them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #192)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:40 PM

198. Gun control proponents regularly engage in mischaracterization...

 

I'm glad you admit prices on guns would go up, at least.


I admit nothing. Explain why legal weed in CO is more expensive than black market weed, and we'll go from there.

We can't have harsher gun laws because... there would be violence?


Gun control proponents regularly engage in mischaracterization. Here, you mischaracterize my argument, by falsely attributing to it, something I did not specify in it - violence.

That was uh...nice...of you, but I was referring to lack of success. Or did you think the war on drugs was a success?

Oh, and by the way, the U.S. is not Australia. Not geographically, and not culturally.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beevul (Reply #198)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 05:22 PM

272. So the US and Australia are utterly incomparable, but comparing a

 

fucking weed to a gun is just apples to apples.

lol.

Australia is not the moon. One can certainly make reasonable predictions based on their national laws. A lot more than you can compare the prices of pot and guns, anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #272)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 07:24 PM

291. Gun control advocates also tend to double down when called on their mischaracterizations...

 

Gun control advocates also tend to double down when called on their mischaracterizations, and mischaracterize again, like you just did:

but comparing a fucking weed to a gun is just apples to apples.


I never compared 'a fucking weed to a gun', I compared prohibition of a thing, to prohibitions of other things.

Australia is not the moon.


Australia is also not the U.S.

One can certainly make reasonable predictions based on their national laws.


Yes, one can, particularly if one looks at how such laws are received when attempted here, such as in CT and NY.

What does 5% compliance in those states indicate for equally/more pro-gun states, such as...nearly every state in the union?

Like I said, the U.S. is not Australia, geographically, or culturally.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beevul (Reply #291)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 08:56 PM

302. In posts #173 and #42, you very clearly made the comparison to marijuana.

 

You are aware that, in forums, your words remain printed right ^^^ over your current post, right?


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #302)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:06 PM

306. In the context of its prohibition.

 

Reading comprehension is your friend.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beevul (Reply #306)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:07 PM

307. Obviously. That's the entire context of the discussion. /nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #307)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:13 PM

308. Then don't accuse me of comparing pot to guns...

 

When I was comparing one prohibition to another.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beevul (Reply #308)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 01:15 AM

357. I didn't mischaracterize your comments.

 

Obviously we're talking about those two items in terms of their price in a setting that bans them. They are not comparable. Pot is easily produced on site. It literally grows like a weed. You don't need to import pot.

Guns are another story entirely. The buyer would pay for the risks taken by all the middlemen along the route-- not to mention the fact that those middlemen are moving guns instead of very profitable illegal drugs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #357)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 12:01 PM

367. Yes you did, and unless you edit or delete...

 

I didn't mischaracterize your comments.


Yes you did, and unless you edit or delete, I'll keep quoting you as proof:

but comparing a fucking weed to a gun is just apples to apples.




That obviously refers to something I've said, and it is a mischaracterization, since I was comparing prohibitions, not comparing guns to "a fucking weed".

Obviously we're talking about those two items in terms of their price in a setting that bans them.


Unless you have a turd in your pocket, that's enough with the "we". You may be talking about 'items in terms of their price in a setting that bans them", I am talking about why would one prohibition work when they other is a clear and obvious failure.

Pot is easily produced on site.


So are guns.

You don't need to import pot.


You don't need to import guns either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #28)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 04:32 AM

50. they would still be dirt cheap

 

look at how low the cost is in the EU (where most are illegal or HIGHLY restricted)

Illegal Gun Trafficking Brings Millions Of Weapons Into The EU


http://www.ibtimes.com/charlie-hebdo-massacre-illegal-gun-trafficking-brings-millions-weapons-eu-1779070



There is no definitive count, but the bloc estimates that around half a million lost or stolen firearms remained unaccounted for within the EU. And that only accounts for weapons that were once registered and later went missing. Many of the automatic “war weapons” are illegally trafficked from the Balkan Peninsula and former Soviet Bloc states, where millions of leftover arms from the Croatian, Bosnian and Kosovo wars are regularly stolen, bought and transferred in small numbers, mostly to organized crime clients in Southern Europe, according to Gunpolicy.org. In France, there are an estimated 10 million to 20 million illegal weapons alone, according to a Christian Science Monitor report.


snip

Guns can be acquired in the EU through a number of means. A .44-caliber Desert Eagle is advertised for 1,250 euros, or $1,481, by an anonymous European arms dealer on the Deep Web. The dealer ships that weapon through the mail. With the proper connections, which the Charlie Hebdo gunmen appeared to have, an AK-47 costs around $400 to $900 in certain European markets, and about $1,100 to 1,800 in France, according to a Bloomberg report.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AntiBank (Reply #50)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:26 PM

184. Not according to this.

 

http://www.smh.com.au/business/world-business/black-market-guns-triple-in-price-20141013-115f08.html

Making an item illegal (so long as there are harsh penalties for possession) does not drive the price down. You pay for all the risk-taking middle men between you and your fix.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #184)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 04:26 PM

252. you erected a strawman. I never said it would drive the price down

 

stop putting words in my mouth. Also Australia is a completely different situation compared to the EU or the USA. It is so geographically isolated and thus has no natural borders of inflow for cheap illegal weapons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AntiBank (Reply #252)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 08:59 PM

305. Well, if your argument is that the price would go up, but not much, you're equally incorrect.

 

Again, see Australia.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #305)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:35 PM

311. you once again fail to see that Australia is vastly different

 

There are NO neighbouring countries such as the ones in Eastern Europe or Mexico for that will keep up a steady supply of illegal arms and thus lower the increase of price dramatically.

THATS why the price increased so much. But you are just being obtuse on purpose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AntiBank (Reply #311)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 01:10 AM

355. Australia is a huge continent, surrounded by massive economies.

 

It isn't a tiny island fortress. If you really think Australia's geographical position makes it's borders so much less porous than those of the US, I don't know what to tell you. This is just an asinine line of reasoning, I'm sorry. I've heard gun nuts make the same argument about Britain, as if it's sea and airports aren't arteries of trade.

This 'island fortress' argument might have made sense in the 1800's-- today, it does not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #355)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 02:41 AM

359. not only are you wrong, but this entire thread is based off

 

a fantasy wherein firearms in the US are outlawed. The 2nd Amendment is never going to be repealed and confiscation would trigger a civil war.

End of story.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AntiBank (Reply #359)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 10:09 AM

362. Not a fantasy, a hypothetical.

 

Hypotheticals sort of require you to accept a premise and extrapolate from it. My personal desires are irrelevant.

But since you brought up fantasies, I think your 'civil war' fantasy is absurd. I seriously doubt it would inspire more than a few isolated militia groups and lone wolves to acts of violence, and they'd be crushed in no time. This isn't 1860-- it wouldn't be rifle against rifle, but rifle against a militarized police force, helicopters, drones, apcs, 360 degree surveillance, cooperating international intelligence agencies, etc. Anyone thinking they're going to challenge the government with their little pea shooter has serious delusions of grandeur.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #362)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 11:49 AM

364. One man 'Challenged' the government just a few days ago.

 

When ten thousand of them decide to do it at the same time, that militarized police force, those helicopters, drones, apcs, 360 degree surveillance, cooperating international intelligence agencies, etc, wont stop it.


How come a militarized police force, helicopters, drones, apcs, 360 degree surveillance, cooperating international intelligence agencies, etc, didn't stop the texas shooter before the 5 vs 1 trade?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beevul (Reply #364)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 12:23 PM

368. Where is that Texas shooter, again?

 

Oh, right--he's in several places, isn't he? Because he's in a bunch of little pieces. I think you just made my point.

I didn't say you can stop all violence. I explicitly stated that I was sure there'd be a few ignorant nitwits who would respond violently, and they'd find themselves facing more than a few rifles, as this Texas clown did. If, hypothetically, ten thousand diabetic Wal-Martians did rise up to start a civil war, ten thousand would be in the dirt the next day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #368)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 12:38 PM

370. Of course you do.

 

I think you just made my point.


Of course you do, because you aren't thinking things through to their logical conclusion.

Where is that Texas shooter, again?

If, hypothetically, ten thousand diabetic Wal-Martians did rise up to start a civil war, ten thousand would be in the dirt the next day



The texas shooter is dead. And? If this scenario is played out proportionally (meaning a 5 to 1 kill rate), with the hypothetical ten thousand I mentioned earlier, that hypothetical ten thousand just wiped out cleanly half of ALL law enforcement in America, and incapacitated half of the remaining half. You do realize there are under a million state local and federal law enforcement in ALL of America, right?

Like I said, you didn't think this through. You obviously don't remember the havoc the DC sniper caused.

I didn't say you can stop all violence.


I didn't say you said you could.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beevul (Reply #370)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 12:59 PM

371. I'm finding it difficult to control my laughter.

 

Yes, one loon with a rifle managed to kill several unsuspecting cops in an ambush before they put his corpse into a collection of body bags. If you think that's what our gun nuts would average in some mystical, spontaneous uprising to defend your toy chest, then I can only shake my head and laugh.

I expect it would trend a little closer to the Ammon Bundy clown show.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #371)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 01:10 PM

374. How many did the DC sniper kill?

 

How many did Whitman kill? How many did the DC sniper kill?



If you think that's what our gun nuts would average in some mystical, spontaneous uprising to defend your toy chest, then I can only shake my head and laugh.


That's nice. People who operate under the assumption that if there ever were such a conflict, it would be like the revolutionary war where lines openly faced each other and the sides were obvious, make me laugh even harder.

Assymetrical conflicts do not work that way. Again, you aren't thinking this through.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beevul (Reply #374)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 04:43 PM

379. There's asymmetrical war, and there's Ammon Bundy-style 'uprising'.

 

A troop of diabetic Wal-Mart shoppers vs. the US Government. Basically Bambi vs. Godzilla. There just aren't enough tired old white guys with militia fetishes, or at least, not enough willing to actually put their money where their mouth is, to be anything but an occasional rampage shooting nut job.

One of us isn't thinking this through, alright-- but it isn't me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #362)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 11:54 AM

366. More likely massive and open non-compliance, with law enforcement agencies refusing to enforce

 

Up to a state level. Those who want to repeal the 2A I believe vastly overestimate the general populations eagerness to surrender armed power on an individual level to the state.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marengo (Reply #366)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 12:25 PM

369. Those who expect a 'civil war' to help them defend their toy chest

 

are vastly overestimating the American public's willingness to upset the apple cart-- not to mention their capacity for doing so.

If we were in the middle of an extended, deep economic depression and those cops weren't being paid, there might be some significant pushback. Maybe. It would still be crushed in days, but it *might* try to start. But today? No, I'm sorry. The police would do their job, collect their checks, and rationalize it as doing their duty, no matter how they felt about the 2nd Amendment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #369)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 01:06 PM

373. I doubt much resistance would be violent, nor would it need be. Compliance and enforcement

 

Would be minimal. IMO, a fair number of states would openly defy any confiscation directives and actively interfere with any federal entity attempting to do so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #28)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:45 PM

203. Sorry, but ganja price is still dropping.

 

As a culture, we are addicted to prohibition. Do you seriously believe markets, business systems and supply & demand remain static when some prohibitionist scheme is adopted?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eleanors38 (Reply #203)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:32 PM

234. Sorry, but you're the one arguing against basic market principles.

 

If you really want to argue that more regulation/control makes prices drop, I have a whole world full of economists to direct you to. It's nonsense. Make it harder to get a thing, and the price goes up. The price of guns in Australia shot up like a rocket once they were made illegal.

Also, pot and guns aren't comparable to begin with. Guns don't grow like... well, weeds, and the consequences for pot possession are relatively light.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to appal_jack (Reply #10)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 01:23 AM

358. Well hell, why have any laws at all then?

 

I mean, criminals are only going to break them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #358)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 11:53 AM

365. Thats a strawman. Nobody wants "no laws".

 

The point is, laws that don't prevent criminals from violence, but burden people not prone to it, are not real useful.

Proof, is in the fact that folks like you keep asking for more and more of them, regardless of how many there currently are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #358)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 01:04 PM

372. Common error.

Well hell, why have any laws at all then?

I mean, criminals are only going to break them.

Malum in se vs. malum prohibitum. Some actions are evil in and of themselves. Gun ownership is not one of them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Original post)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 01:23 AM

17. It's almost pathetic that all of the mass shootings in recent

 

years have done nothing to change the gun debate, but finally the shooting of some cops may actually make a difference. Maybe.

Has the NRA spoken up yet on this?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Original post)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 01:32 AM

20. Modern military assault rifles never were meant for everyone.

 

They were meant for the military. An example of that was yesterday when a robot bomb was needed to take what's his name down.

If you cannot figure that one out, then goodbye. We have nothing to talk about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rusty quoin (Reply #20)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:52 AM

43. The weapons in question, are not "Modern military assault rifles".

 

They're semi-automatic rifles designed specifically for the civilian market that do not function like the military weapons they resemble.

They're designed as such, because the law says they have to be, to be legal to sell.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beevul (Reply #43)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:55 AM

133. You know you've lost when you're trying to debate the definition of the weapon

If a weapon can fire as fast as I can initiate the firing mechanism and I can fire and reload dozens of rounds in mere seconds with an unlimited amount of ammunition I can purchase legally...

That is the problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KeepItReal (Reply #133)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:17 PM

176. We weren't debating the 'definition'...

 

We weren't debating the 'definition', we were debating whether the nature of the weapon matched the definition you chose to use, and it didn't.

If a weapon can fire as fast as I can initiate the firing mechanism and I can fire and reload dozens of rounds in mere seconds with an unlimited amount of ammunition I can purchase legally...

That is the problem.


If that was true, the US would be a war zone with millions dead annually.


Spin and hyperbole aren't going to get you anywhere on this topic, and you aren't going to find support among the American people, to take lawfully ownable firearm technology back into the 1800s, or to ban them all together.

Sorry.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rusty quoin (Reply #20)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 04:11 AM

46. Interesting

If they are so deadly why don't the military use them?? They use the M4 instead, a very different rifle..

We have nothing to talk about, because you lack basic understanding of the subject at hand, let me use point out some hard facts.. If they where ment for the military, WHY don't the military USE them??

I don't believe ANY military in the world, uses the AR 15.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rusty quoin (Reply #20)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 08:02 AM

71. Agreed. That's why the US has banned them since the 1930s

Modern military assault rifles are not available to civilians in the US. It's been a piece of gun control that has worked very well for about 8 decades.

(That said, the exact same clause in the law banned sawed-off shotguns; that has not worked nearly as well. It's probably worth pondering on why one has worked and the other has not.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #71)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 08:05 AM

73. Way to twist the argument.

You know what he meant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #73)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 08:07 AM

75. *He* doesn't know what he meant. He thinks AR-15s fire faster than other rifles. He's wrong.

Until the Democratic Party gets over this very basic but very pervasive factual error, we're going to be chasing our tails on gun control.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #75)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 08:17 AM

77. That is not the point, at all.

You're making the "military rifles are fully automatic, civilian rifles are semi-automatic" argument. It's been a very useful straw man for a long time. While he may be technically incorrect about these being "military," the point remains that NONE of these weapons ought to be in the hands of civilians. Period.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #77)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 08:46 AM

84. None of *which* weapons? Semi-automatics?

80% of guns manufactured in the past century? If that's what people mean, they need to say it, and we can start working on it. What we can't do is pretend that there's some small class of guns we can ban and that capability will go away. Hell, like I said in another post, if I could snap my fingers and replace every semi-automatic handgun (which are the real problems) with an AR-15, I would do it, and I think it would make the country safer...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #84)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:49 AM

100. Most people don't know all the terminology

because they are disgusted by the very notion of these weapons. I agree that people should be educated, but again, this is all a deflection from the real issue. It's missing the forest through the trees. And while I agree handguns are an extreme problem, especially in domestic violence/street crime situations, semi-auto rifles are unquestionably the go-to tools for mass murder.

Start a buy-back program and melt them all down. They serve no pumps in modern America.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #100)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:43 AM

125. Getting the terminology right is critical

 

We are talking firearms on a board for liberals and I find it extremely frustrating when people start talking about banning "assault weapons" because they are "military" weapons. The simple fact is that they are not and never have been and are used in a minuscule number of overall killings. So when you start from a factually incorrect and uninformed premise you are going to get tuned out, and even more so when this discussion takes place in the national arena with Republicans who don't necessarily trust you on the issue to begin with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TeddyR (Reply #125)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:58 AM

135. I agree we need to be educated so we may fight from a position of strength

but statements like these-

"The simple fact is that they are not and never have been and are used in a minuscule number of overall killings"

ignore and excuse the fact that they are the weapon of choice for people looking to commit mass murder.

No more excuses. No more half-measures.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #135)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:06 AM

140. The Virginia Tech shooter

 

Killed 32 people with two semi-auto handguns. So banning "assault weapons" isn't going to stop mass shootings. If you want to make these weapons perhaps less dangerous then enact a high capacity mag ban.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #135)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:39 PM

197. Rifles of any kind are rarely used in murders

 

Yes, a few high profile ones. Handguns kill thousands of times more and those are just the facts. Why is no one on here mentioning the many more killed in Chicago weekly?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #100)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:00 AM

137. What are "these" weapons?

Seriously. What weapons are you talking about? This isn't derailing or deflecting; you are just ubcomfortable that there's no good answer to that question.

Why is this the only issue about which liberals are proud to advocate policies from an admitted position of ignorance?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #137)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:15 AM

145. I'm not uncomfortable with it at all-

And I am grouping many types of guns together because they all share the same thing in common--they are tools of murder.

I agree with you we cannot fight from a position of ignorance. But too often we get caught up in these technical distinctions which DO derail the bigger picture, the bigger goal--to end this scourge of violence in our country.

When it comes time to write the laws, the experts will make all of this very clear. The layman does not need to know every detail to help enact change. The point is to stop cowering before the gun lobby, and speak harsh truths to people like yourself. I respect you and your opinions. But I am also advocating that you make sacrifices for the greater good.

I'm not the guy who will make or break the argument. I'm just one voice saying enough is enough, and asking people to join me in saying so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #145)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:37 AM

148. We tried that way once and got the disastrous AWB

No thanks. I have no desire to keep "these weapons" legal but regulate their grip shape. You shouldn't either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #145)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:44 PM

202. It is really very simple if you would just admit it

 

Bolt , pump action or lever action rifle
Semi-automatic rifle
Fully automatic or burst fire rifle

Please stop with it looks like a military weapon or what kind of features it had. KISS principal, when you let those so called legislative experts make the laws you get crap like that AWB. You do know the firearm used at Sandy Hook was fully AWB compliant, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #137)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:43 AM

153. +1

 

Why is this the only issue about which liberals are proud to advocate policies from an admitted position of ignorance?


In fact, if one actually makes an attempt to educate themselves about firearms, there is a good chance one will be accused by fellow progressives about being a 'gun humper.'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Matrosov (Reply #153)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:46 PM

205. Or an ammosexual

 

Not to mention, posting NRA talking points

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #100)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:51 PM

211. If you are in the business of banning, you better.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #71)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:03 AM

109. It very easy to convert a semi-auto to full auto. Truthfully, a semi-auto is sufficiently deadly.

Orlando, Dallas, Sandy Hook, etc., are evidence enough of that. Don't you think?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #109)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:03 AM

139. None of those were converted to full auto

Hoyt, I respect you, and this is a serious question: do you honestly think the guns in those massacres had been converted to full auto?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #139)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:09 AM

143. No, you've totally missed the point. Semi-autos can kill 50 people quickly. And if you want,

they can be converted. Semi vs full-auto is just a smoke screen, nothing more.

But why convert them-- Orlando, Dallas, Sandy Hook, etc., prove a semi-auto does the job. In fact, the military keep their weapons on select fire most of the time.

You usually are on target, but here you've missed it -- Who cares if guns sold here are just semi-auto, you don't need a full-auto to kill a lot of people efficiently.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #143)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:38 AM

149. So drop the "military" nonsense

What people want is to ban semi autos. Just say that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #149)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:45 AM

154. Time to ban/restrict semi-autos. Thought it was clear.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #154)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:48 AM

155. You're being clear; the OP isn't

I'm all for rescheduling semi-autos under the NFA

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #109)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:48 PM

207. It is not easy and has not been for decades

 

Weapons are now manufactured so military or equivalent parts will not fit. The receivers are just not close to being military specification.

Please stop posting that misinformation bull

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #109)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:53 PM

212. Bullshit.

 

Any rifle easy to convert is classified under law as a machinegun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beevul (Reply #212)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:04 PM

222. So this slide stock does not exist, even though it's sold on Amazon.com.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #222)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:11 PM

225. Were those goalposts heavy hoyt?

 

It very easy to convert a semi-auto to full auto.


The word 'convert' has a very specific meaning.

So this slide stock does not exist, even though it's sold on Amazon.com.


That does not 'convert' a rifle in any way, the trigger must still be pulled every time before a round can be fired.


Weak sauce.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beevul (Reply #225)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:18 PM

226. I've already posted a video of how to do it internally. The slide stock is a conversion too.


But, beevul, the real point is that with all the gunner obsfucation -- it's not an "assault" rifle because it's semi-auto; it's a magazine, not a clip; and similar BS -- the exact rifles used by the Orlando, Dallas, Sandy Hook, etc., killers are available today to all those yahoos who got up early and lined up to buy one.

Line the Saturday after Sandy Hook for chance to buy a quasi-assault rifle exactly like the one Adam Lanza used:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #226)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:28 PM

230. Not in this thread you haven't.

 

The slide stock is a conversion too.


No, it isn't. The trigger must still be pulled before each and every round is fired.

If it were otherwise, it would be illegal.

But, beevul, the real point is that will all the gunner obsfucation -- it's not an "assault" rifle because it's semi-auto; it's a magazine, not a clip; and similar BS...


Blubbedy blubbedy blub.

You made a very specific and very false claim (which I suspect you knew was false when you made it).

I let you know that your claim was false. You then put forward in support of this false claim, evidence which does not support it.

Just admit you are wrong and we can move on.


Line the Saturday after Sandy Hook for chance to buy a quasi-assault rifle exactly like the one Adam Lanza used:


You have no idea what anyone in that line went there to buy. Zip, zero, nada.


If you listen closely, you may hear your name being whispered, that's reality calling to you, pining for your safe return.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beevul (Reply #230)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:34 PM

236. Fact is, real military assault rifles are used on select fire most of the time.

The rifles available down the street at your favorite gun store are exactly like those used in Orlando/Newtown/Dallas/Etc mass shootings, to intimidate people, to shoot ones spouse, to soothe gunners fears, etc., every friggin day.

Here's a Bundy militiaman drawing down on federal agents with a rifle available at most gun stores right this minute:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #236)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:43 PM

241. Fact is, you don't know what you're talking about.

 

Fact is, real military assault rifles are used on select fire most of the time.


Fact is, you don't know what you're talking about. 'Select fire' is the type of weapon it is, not a 'mode it can be put into'.

Tell us more about them.

The rifles available down the street at your favorite gun store are exactly like those used in Orlando/Newtown/Dallas/Etc mass shootings, to intimidate people, to shoot ones spouse, to soothe gunners fears, etc., every friggin day.


All your opinion.

Here's a Bundy militiaman drawing down on federal agents with a rifle available at most gun stores right this minute:


Without seeing the sight picture in the scope, I'd say its a leap to conclude exactly what he was aiming at.

But then, for those that behave as if they can read minds over the internet, I imagine it doesn't seem such a leap.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beevul (Reply #241)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:46 PM

242. Beevul, it's a title with editing to make it fit. You know what it means, or should. Quit playing

Quit playing the "gun nomenclature game." Real assault rifles are seldom used on full auto.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #242)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:50 PM

246. ROFL.

 

That's what I'd say too, if I were ignorant about a subject that I was trying to be mouthy and pseudo-authoritative about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Original post)


Response to morningfog (Original post)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 01:59 AM

24. The prospect of having to "give them up" is exactly what they live for.

Last edited Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:02 AM - Edit history (1)

It's the only thing that gives their otherwise empty lives any meaning. The feverish hope that one day, one glorious day, the 'gubmint' is going to come for their guns, and they can do a Rambo-style "weaponing-up" montage-style maneuver that fulfills all of their squalid dreams. Going out in a blaze of glory.

Yeah, they'll probably have to give their guns up some day. But they're going to kill a lot of people before that actually happens...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Original post)


Response to morningfog (Original post)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:12 AM

29. I'll keep my semi-automatic rifles. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Original post)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:15 AM

36. Why? Germany, Austria, Italy, New Zealand, among others, all allow them and it's OK...BAN PISTOLS.

Of course, the section on "Legality" in the AR-15 article on Wikipedia has conveniently vanished, but suffice it to say that literally dozens of countries allow private AR-15/"assault rifle" ownership, they just properly and reasonably restrict ownership in the first place. Mostly by severely limiting HANDGUNS.

Rifles of all kinds killed less than 300 people in 2014, while handguns killed almost 7,000 - do you honestly feel that assault weapons are a good Waterloo for gun control?

THREE HUNDRED vs SEVEN THOUSAND. That's my calculus. Ban handguns now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Reply #36)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:33 AM

39. Yes, ban all guns NOW, in the USA.

That's the only logical option.

There is no middle ground. Either stick with your huge mass murder problem, or give up all the guns.

It's time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to underahedgerow (Reply #39)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:43 AM

40. So, you propose the absolute strictest gun control in the world, off the bat?

Even Japan allows it, theoretically at least..

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Reply #40)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:23 AM

95. Yes, I propose banning all guns except those for agricultural purposes,

as I keep stating, over and over.

The rest of the civilized world manages it just fine.

It's really not that difficult.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to underahedgerow (Reply #95)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:49 AM

129. It is HUGELY difficult

 

First, you'd have to amend the constitution, which isn't going to happen on this issue. Then (or assuming you get Heller reversed) you'd have to pass the ban on a federal level because numerous state constitutions protect private ownership of firearms. Next you'd have to figure out how to get 300,000,000 guns out of the hands of private citizens, the vast majority of whom would simply ignore any ban. None of those things sounds particularly easy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to underahedgerow (Reply #95)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:29 PM

190. Most of the civilized world hasn't banned guns.

However if you truly believe all firearms should be banned then you are getting start on that constitutional convention right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Statistical (Reply #190)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:36 PM

196. The Constitution is hardly a perfect document, and it is meant to be a fluid document that

evolves.

It's time for that evolution.

But hey, I guess the gun humpers haven't had enough death, murder, suicide, slaughter and destruction.

No evolution for you!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to underahedgerow (Reply #196)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 04:44 PM

260. Well then get out from"underahedgerow" and get busy.

Or are you a "keyboard Kommando" only capable of spreading highly disingenuous crap on the internutz.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oneshooter (Reply #260)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 05:25 PM

273. I do what I can. I've done what I can on other issues, far too deep to detail here.



I've made as much of a difference as I can, and I've done some good work. Some huge differences, and a lot of good, small ones.

It was my idea, way back in the 90's, to take down the giant billboard on Sunset Blvd in West Hollywood of the Marlboro Man. It was iconic, had been there for decades. I brought the notion to my city councilman who had it taken down. He got the credit, and I'm fine with that, he was the one on the stump, not me. I didn't need any glory. I was happy to instigate the process.

The same guy was one of the first to create a ban Saturday Night Specials in a city. Let's just say it wasn't his idea, but he took the credit and made it happen, and again, since he was the public official, I was thrilled that he did. He needed someone to light the fire, to let him know he should go for it. He learned that anything really IS possible. I've always believed anything is possible.

I'm proof that anything is possible.

I work my magic behind the scenes, always have. I run a couple of websites, am active with those sites on Facebook and Twitter and have a good presence on social media, and that's where I do my work. I get a few thousand hits a month, which isn't bad for being less than 6 months old, and I'm still on the learning curve of how to make a good site tick along with integrating social media; my followers are growing steadily, and I'm happy with that.

Nothing will change until the good voices yell loud enough to drown out the bad voices. Clearly the USA isn't ready to take back all that the GOP has taken away. Not sure it will be, even in the next generation or two. Perhaps it's heading for the prescient Maxx Headroom reality after all.

I know I keep checking airfares to head back to visit, and can't bring myself to get on the plane. I had a long discussion with a French friend who lived in AZ for about 8 years while in his teens. He's now 30, and was almost in tears yesterday because he was so upset at the abuse he's taking from his AZ school pals on FB who are all gun humpers, and he of course supports the rational position of banning all guns. They're trump supporters and guns fanatics, and he just doesn't understand how they can all be so effing stupid, and worse, incredibly rude and abusive to him. I told him that he evolved and they didn't, and that he can't argue with stupid. He's just got to walk away from them.... he's gutted.

It's either all or nothing on this issue, there's no middle ground and no compromise.

What are you going to do about it? Any ideas?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to underahedgerow (Reply #95)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:51 PM

210. What's an agricultural purpose?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to underahedgerow (Reply #39)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:54 AM

44. How about "No". N/T

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to underahedgerow (Reply #39)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 04:29 AM

49. No..

And what are you going to do about it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to underahedgerow (Reply #39)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:17 AM

94. All guns?

 

Do you really mean ALL guns?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Reply #36)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 08:03 AM

72. Thank you. The 2nd Amendment argument for handguns is much weaker, too

Last edited Sat Jul 9, 2016, 04:07 PM - Edit history (1)

If I could snap my fingers and replace every handgun in the US with an AR-15, I would do that, and I think we'd be much safer for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #72)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:00 PM

216. Interesting. Given the data and ergonomics, you might be right.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #72)

Mon Jul 11, 2016, 12:45 AM

389. I don't actually support *banning* handguns, but I do realize they're the bigger problem by 20x.

Quoting myself here…
I believe in a nationwide, mandatory ownership license, with safety and responsibility training.
I believe in mandatory dealer transfers, where not only is a background check performed, but a record of the sale is made.
I believe in a "title", much like a car, where the duly legal owner of the firearm is documented, and it must be passed to the next owner, with record of transaction. Possessed by the owner, but severe penalties for not having it.
I believe in severe, mandatory, criminal charges for gun crime, including failure to secure your gun properly.
I believe in handgun registration.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Original post)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 04:04 AM

45. I am under NO obligation to obey unjust laws..

No need to fear any consequences of any bans, because you will need to find someone to enforce it "chuckles"..

Can't even enforce drug laws, how are you going to deal with people like me, that are LOLing at bans, and live in communities, and among law enforcement that AGREE with me???.. And if you do manage a ban, how will you deal with "Sanctuary STATES"? that will be certain to crop up?? The same way we deal with sanctuary cities?

All the while, as a trained CNC machinist, I may be building more, and more, and more, and more... I wonder how many I can make in a DAY? Wanna find out??

How do you deal with folks like me, with certain skills, and absolutely no fear of any consequences from any very poorly wrote, thought out, knee jerk, emotion based, and ultimately unenforceable legislation?

Heck I may even make a thread here teaching people how to make their own ammunition...share my knowledge for FREE..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to virginia mountainman (Reply #45)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 08:54 AM

86. There goes that "law-abiding" BS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #86)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:44 PM

201. And you've never broken a law, mister self admitted former robber? N/T

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to virginia mountainman (Reply #45)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:48 AM

99. Good luck making your own powder and primer

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MillennialDem (Reply #99)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 06:34 PM

281. It is not a problem..

I can get a nice substitute at any grocery store...yes even the primers will not present a problem...


Been loading my own ammo for years, want me too teach you how?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to virginia mountainman (Reply #281)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 08:58 PM

303. No, I'd never waste a single penny on that horrible (outside of war) industry.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MillennialDem (Reply #303)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:49 PM

313. Who's wasting?

Ban guns and Ammunition, and you will make many MANY people very wealthy.

And without the social stigma of prohibition!

It's a win win!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to virginia mountainman (Reply #313)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:50 PM

314. Irrelevant to my point. I said I will never spend a penny on guns.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MillennialDem (Reply #314)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:55 PM

315. But you do spend money on guns and ammo.

Do you pay taxes? if so then a part of those taxes are used to provide equipment, including guns and ammo, to your police officers. in addition you are paying for the guns and ammunition used by the military.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oneshooter (Reply #315)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:22 PM

324. Oh brother

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Original post)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 04:40 AM

51. Not a chance in hell.

 

I'm a white occupier of wall st z-park. My girlfriend is black. We regularly shoot our ar15's and ak47's here at ranges in New York. You will never live to see the day any of us give up our semi autos. We are democrats that have completely rejected Cuomo's SAFE Act. You can type your fantasy until you're blue in the face. It will never happen.

Join The Liberal Gun Club website and help us fight assault weapons bans, universal background checks and magazine capacity limits. The Liberal Gun Club is against it all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Original post)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 05:21 AM

52. Aren't the majority of shootings done with handguns?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonathanRackham (Reply #52)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:23 AM

113. ssssssssshhhhhhhhhh nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonathanRackham (Reply #52)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:53 PM

213. Yes

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duckhunter935 (Reply #213)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:29 PM

231. During WWI shotguns were used as trench clearing firearms

They're still used today by LEO'S and military to breach and clear houses.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Original post)


Response to morningfog (Original post)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 06:42 AM

55. People that use an assault weapon for hunting suck at hunting.

 

The fact that some nonetheless use them for hunting is a triumph for terrorist propaganda from the NRA and the irresponsible weapons manufacturers that support it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #55)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 08:00 AM

70. OK, what you've just done is shown that you don't understand what these are.

Do you think they fire "more bullets" than "non-assault" weapons? (They don't)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #55)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:13 AM

110. Yeah - that handgrip sure makes a "wanna be" hunter a real wussie.






Obviously these are much more macho...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #55)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 06:45 PM

284. And you hunt how often? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Original post)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 07:14 AM

58. The constitution doesn't mention hunting and sporting as the reason to be able to carry

The rifle of our choosing. The reason is to keep our own government in check should they become tyrannical.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FXSTD (Reply #58)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:50 PM

348. I'd like for you to quote the exact phrase in the Constitution

that states that the right to keep and bear arms is for the purpose of keeping our government in check. I'll just give you a hint: you won't be able to. So stop bullshitting about the Constitution, please.

The intent of the Second Amendment is to ensure that militias could be readily supplied with armed citizens. At the time the Constitution was written, militias were considered by many in the Congress to be a superior alternative to a standing army. You can read quite a bit about this in Ron Chernow's excellent biography of George Washington (and how it just about screwed the Revolution).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GaYellowDawg (Reply #348)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 12:35 AM

349. The preamble comes pretty close.

 

THE Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beevul (Reply #349)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 12:38 AM

350. Well I don't see guns, or oppressive government mentioned anywhere there. So...

That's a HUGE stretch. If you stretched underwear like that, you'd have to throw it away.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GaYellowDawg (Reply #350)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 12:44 AM

351. No, you don't.

 

What you do see, is restrictions on government of which the second amendment is one, aimed at keeping government 'beneficient', which is on the other end of the scale from oppressive.

So no, not a huge stretch.


THE Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GaYellowDawg (Reply #348)

Thu Jul 14, 2016, 05:30 AM

420. "A well regulated militia"

I may add.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Original post)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 07:20 AM

59. Do we have to pit gun carriers and gun haters against each other on this site again?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to romanic (Reply #59)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 07:26 AM

60. Yes. Because the gun lovers are standing in the way of societal progress.

 

Paranoid relics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #60)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 07:27 AM

61. Discussions have to be made.

But I don't think insulting people on here who carry legally is a good bridge to talking. js

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to romanic (Reply #61)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 07:29 AM

62. I've lost patience. Every goddamned time, these assholes trot

 

out the same old shit. Enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #62)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 07:31 AM

64. Good luck.

I don't see how calling other people on here assholes, gun humpers, ammosexuals or whatever else is going to incite a civil conversation but ok. :p

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to romanic (Reply #64)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:31 AM

96. Not interested in a civil conversation with this people. They are irrational.

 

I think it's mental illness induced by too much lead exposure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #96)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:24 AM

115. You are free to keep thinking wrongly, & losing votes.

 

Bye now.

-app

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to appal_jack (Reply #115)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:09 AM

142. I don't need your permission. So long.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #142)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:42 AM

152. Hope the fog clears for you some day.

 

Then you can see, read, and understand our Constitution.

Coffee maybe, to clear that fog? You don't need my permission to drink that either, although there have been movements to regulate or even ban it in the past (17th Century Europe and early 20th Century USA, for example).

-app

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to appal_jack (Reply #152)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 12:53 PM

160. I thought you were leaving?

 

Don't you have some lead to handle?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #62)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 08:23 AM

79. +1

The time for coddling these people is over.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MirrorAshes (Reply #79)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 01:30 PM

165. You don't coddle them.

They are kicking your ass in the political and public arena .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #62)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:56 PM

214. Way to win your argument, lol

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duckhunter935 (Reply #214)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 04:22 PM

249. I don't give a FUCK. Not trying to win an argument. Get o. It get the fuck out of the way.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #249)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 04:30 PM

253. That attitude is why

 

Nothing ever gets done sadly

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duckhunter935 (Reply #253)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 06:26 PM

277. No, it is the people who worship the gun and stroke it.

 

It is the people who are pro-mass murder. Fuck them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #277)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 06:32 PM

279. And who is that, me?

 

Because I believe in the RKBA?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duckhunter935 (Reply #279)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 08:27 PM

293. You'll have to try on your own shoes.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #293)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 08:31 PM

296. You directed that response to me

 

So it would seem that you were saying I was one of those. I know I am not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #277)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 06:46 PM

285. And tell us, who are those people? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oneshooter (Reply #285)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 08:27 PM

292. They are obvious.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #292)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 08:33 PM

297. They are not, point some out

 

You are the one making the accusations about people. Come on, quit being coy and put up or be quiet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #249)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 04:45 PM

261. No I have decided not to. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to romanic (Reply #59)

Thu Jul 14, 2016, 05:34 AM

421. Is anybody here against their own free will?

Tell me about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Original post)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 07:29 AM

63. The definition debate has to preclude reform concerning assault rifles.

How can we write a law that bans something, without defining the thing we are banning?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Original post)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 07:54 AM

67. We won't be giving them up.



I just bought two more this month.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #67)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:20 PM

178. I'm thinking of picking up an SKS 7.62mm

 

This talk of banning them makes me want one.

My 77 year old mother who has never owned a gun in her life told me the only way she would EVER get a gun would be the day they were banned.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #178)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:48 PM

206. I'm right there too.

 

This talk of banning them makes me want one.


I'm right there too. The more they grind their axe about them, the more tempting it is to start saving and buy one.

Outside of that, I don't really want or need one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #178)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:51 PM

209. If you're interested....


j&g sales has used Chinese models for $330 plus another $20 for shipping to your FFL and another $25-50 for a transfer and you can have it for $400 or less.

I was just looking at them.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #209)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 04:33 PM

255. Man, I was told no background checks for internet sales

 

You mean there is a law that requires that?




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Original post)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 07:55 AM

68. License and insure, just like cars

Some people own many cars, but if the cost of license and insurance is high, maybe a few will do. That tax can be used to fund emergency rooms where injuries are treated, and for the cost of the many funerals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to greymattermom (Reply #68)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 08:56 AM

87. And tax them annually, just like cars.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #87)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:50 AM

102. Whoops, posted in wrong place. My apologies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to greymattermom (Reply #68)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:00 PM

217. I do not need a license and insurance to OWN

 

a car. Then we should also allow weapons to be sold without any background check. Sell weapons across state lines. Sell weapons over the internet in eBay. 50 state open carry as long as I am insured and the weapon is registered.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to greymattermom (Reply #68)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 07:05 PM

382. tax a civil liberty?

Poll taxes went away long ago....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Original post)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 08:06 AM

74. I agree. And "open carry" has to go away.

How does anyone - especially a cop - know if the guy walking down the street with the weapons is a bad guy or a good guy? IMO, people who insist on displaying their weaponry on their bodies have no regard for the rest of us. If I enter a business and see Joe Lunatic standing there with his AK while buying paint, I leave.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vinca (Reply #74)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 08:09 AM

76. That's interesting: I'm personally much more bothered by concealed carry

If somebody is displaying their gun openly I'm generally pretty sure they're not someone to worry about. It's the person hiding it (and obviously I have no idea who that is) that troubles me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #76)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 08:21 AM

78. I'm bothered by that, too. Personally, I'd like all guns gone.

My point is you can't tell a good guy from a bad guy and for cops, especially, this creates a real dilemma. There was a young black man wearing a camouflage shirt and carrying a long gun at the Dallas rally. He was one of the good guys, but when the shooting started, someone reported him as one of the shooters. If he hadn't managed to find a cop to hand his weapon over to he probably would have been shot. That also negates the notion that carrying a weapon will keep you safe if you feel you must turn it over to a cop to avoid being shot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #76)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:01 PM

219. Me too, open carry

 

Allows that situational awareness. I am against open carry myself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Original post)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 08:34 AM

82. Nope

 

If you want to ban assault rifles, you'll have to ban semi-automatic rifles altogether.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027921026

While I'm fine with that, how are we going to get tens of millions of rifles off the streets?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Original post)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:41 AM

97. No. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Original post)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:50 AM

101. Honestly, we should ban all handguns. Let the fetishists keep their long guns, hand guns cause

 

more death and destruction every year and they're CONCEALABLE. Name and shame the people who want to carry long guns around.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Original post)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:56 AM

105. Police?

What I don't understand is why police groups don't stand up for an assault weapon ban.

They can't defend themselves against shooters who are more heavily armed than they are.

Maybe Dallas will get some to speak up, but I doubt it.

For assault weapon bans and bans on people on watch lists buying guns, police should be shouting in favor of laws.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mainstreetonce (Reply #105)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:43 PM

200. because the AWB was ineffective.

Police aren't outgunned. Police have actual military hardware. Most Police Officers are well aware that in 90%+ of homicides involving a firearm it means a handgun was used.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Statistical (Reply #200)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:50 PM

208. In mass shootings

it is an assault type weapon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Original post)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:00 AM

107. Orlando, Dallas, Sandy Hook, etc., prove semi-autos are plenty deadly, but gunners can convert

semi-auto to full auto with a little bit of work. Heck, you can buy a sliding stock at Amazon for $99.99 that will do just that -- and it's legal.

Here are some simple techniques well known to just about any so-called "law-abiding" gunner:

This first one is a quick, 8 second clip showing how a 1911 -- common semi-auto pistol -- can be rapid fired WITHOUT any modification (my apologizes but I tried to find an effective, short video that does not make fun of the man, that is not my intention):




Slide stock, perfectly legal and available on Amazon for $99.99:



http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/how-make-your-gun-shoot-fully-automatic-one-easy-step



Other conversion techniques:





There are hundreds of other techniques including a little machine work on the lower. I’m sure many white wing militia groups can show one how to do it, or provide a referral if one can’t do a simple google search.


BUT THE TRUTH IS -- despite all the obfuscation by gunners -- A SEMI-AUTO RIFLE OR PISTOL WILL KILL LOTS OF PEOPLE QUICKLY. THEY DON'T NEED AN HONEST TO GOD FULLY AUTO "ASSAULT RIFLE" TO DO IT. AND, THEY KNOW IT.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #107)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 01:31 PM

167. And how many people are killed by rifles annually? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #167)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:35 PM

195. I'd like to hear about one instance of a mass shooting where a bump fire stock was in use.

 

There has not been a single mass shooting where the shooter bump fired.

That could be because, while it can be fun, bump firing is incredibly inaccurate and simply throws a lot of ammunition down range without actually hitting the intended target.

The bump fire stocks are a novelty, nothing more. They can also result in curious law enforcement coming to where you are firing expecting the worst.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #167)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:01 PM

218. Once again, I have no issue restricting semi-auto pistols too. Just riding the wave of opposition

to so-called semi-auto assault rifles. Restricting them will close down much of the gun industry. Pistols should be next.

As I've said before, allowing people to keep a gun or two AT HOME for hunting doesn't really bother me. So no, I don't support a full ban.

People who need em deserve to have a gun to cherish behind closed doors -- revolver, bolt or lever action.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #218)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:04 PM

220. What you say makes me happy.

I wish all gun controllers were like you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #220)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 10:09 PM

386. LOL!

I see what you did thier.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #107)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:25 PM

183. The first two videos ARE NOT automatic weapons. They are sem-automatic approved by the BATF.

 

What the third video instructs you to do is illegal already. HAd they actually filed down the mechanism, they would have committed a federal felony.

There are well over 100,000,000 semi-automatic weapons in general circulation in the United States. Suggesting you grab them is evenmore absurd than suggesting you can deport 11,000,000 undocumented people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #183)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:56 PM

215. Didn't say they were fully automatic. It's a technique to simulate full auto.

BESIDES, SEMI-AUTOS ARE PLENTY DEADLY AND ALLOW PEOPLE TO KILL LOTS OF FOLKS IN A VERY SHORT TIME. Personally, I think that is why they are so popular.

MAYBE IF YOU GUN GUYS WOULD QUIT ARGUING THAT "it's not an assault weapon" and similar BS, we'd get something done. Let's call it a QUASI/PSEUDO-ASSAULT WEAPON if that makes you happy.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #215)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:38 PM

239. That was the implication you made when you used the word 'convert'.

 

But then you knew that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beevul (Reply #239)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:43 PM

240. Look at what I said and stop pointing at each word. This is exactly what I said above bumpfirer:

"This first one is a quick, 8 second clip showing how a 1911 -- common semi-auto pistol -- can be rapid fired WITHOUT any modification . . . . . ."


Once again, Beevul, if you are no more perceptive than that, you need to give up your guns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #240)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:48 PM

243. I am.

 

"...but gunners can convert semi-auto to full auto with a little bit of work."


Remember saying that?


Once again, Beevul, if you are no more perceptive than that, you need to give up your guns.


If your memory is so short that you can't remember what you said, you don't have any business telling me what I should or shouldn't do.

Now, be a consistent lad and make some snide comment about a gun in my pantz, wont you?


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #107)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 03:04 PM