sol740

Congrats, much wunt.

I hope it's good.

and they suck.

 

Isn't that the point. :gabe:

Fuck. Wunt wun.

Fucking hardcore.

A gun is a tool with many purposes. To simplify it to a matter of being "designed to kill" is disingenuous reduction, and implying of evil intent. On the contrary, the primary function of the firearms I purchase is to defend. Or the exact opposite of the implied intent liberals apply to all guns in general, in attempt to hammer (get it, hammer) home the message that gun-owners are violent, by nature of the desire to own firearms.

Just in case anyone is curious, the targets are hung from the ceiling, then I hung a loose bed sheet behind each target, that feeds the BBs that miss the targets down into a box. It actually works very well, I'd say 95% of the time. Which is why we also wear eye protection.

I've been training my 4 and 6 year olds in a makeshift range in my basement. Airsoft rifles and sticky targets. They both know to point downrange, keep their fingers off the triggers till on target, and I'm trying to teach proper handling but it's difficult being so tiny. I've also been teaching them the difference between toys, airsoft/bb guns, and true firearms, and what to do if they ever find one. I'm proud to report my son found my AR lower on my office desk a while back, and immediately ran to tell me.

You're right, which is why you must be licensed and registered as a driver.

 

I'm against firearm registration, but I think personal licensing is becoming a more attractive option to the things that are being thrown out there.

 

edit: cars weren't around or affordable for most of America's history. I hope we someday have an amendment regarding usage, considering some of the shit i see on roads daily.

 

Driving is a privilege, firearms are a right. We already have "common sense" limits. Pretty much the only tiny concession I'm willing to make is background checks on private sales. As long as the process is quick, inexpensive, and the personal info destroyed post-check. I personally would like to know if the person I'm selling to is a felon, or mentally unstable individual.

 

 

dude every report that was out said it was in the trunk

 

I don't think every report I saw mentioned it, but certainly one or two I saw. In fairness, first reports were about the wrong person, that his mom was a teacher, that she was in the school, that there were multiple shooters. First moments notice info isn't necessarily something I'd cling to. Though the video footage that they surely must have, would squash any rumblings. It is at least curious we don't see any. No, before some asshole protests, not kids being shot, him entering the building, or walking through the lot.

 

It makes me sick that the liberal left used the death of these kids as a pedestal to gain control over guns.

 

There was no AR used in sandy hook.

 

I agree completely with the first part. Can't say I know for sure on the second.

That's because it's not about banning assault rifles. That's just the tip. NY is the perfect example. If 10 round mags were common sense enough, why push for 7 round mag limits? Next will be revolvers only. They want a full on ban, and they're willing to chip away one terrible incident at a time to do it.

That's the sad state of personal responsibility in this country. Companies have to protect themselves from law suits, as they could and likely would be held liable if an employee had an incident, such as accidentally (well, negligently) discharging his weapon, or if one were to fire in defense and hit a bystander. I would personally love a company to have a don't ask, don't tell policy regarding personal firearms, but I certainly understand why they don't in our sue-happy America. Until there are protections in place (I don't see that happening) for employers, employees that choose to arm themselves must understand that they will likely lose their jobs should they have to use it. I imagine few people value their jobs (particularly gas station jobs) over their lives.

Congrats on the pickup.

Fuck, me thinks I want one.

I've never hated Obama before, I've certainly disagreed with him, disliked his policies and what have you. However watching him parade those children around the stage, with the letters? I can't think of an action by any president in my lifetime, more despicable, more calculating, more vacuously political. The children are tools for the agenda, and that's it. Disgusting.

Good question. I just don't know if this is the best way of doing it. Ideally I'd think having a Police Officer (or 2) would be better than vigilante teachers. I can't trust a teacher to teach history to a child correctly, let alone prevent a mass shooting.

 

I guess what we can hope for is that it will be more of a deterrent than anything else.

 

I would personally rather have police protecting our children than jailing non-violent drug offenders, so I agree, though dismantling the "gun-free zone" stupidity for all responsible adults who wish to carry should be on the priory list as well. Unless we want police there for sports practices, teachers conferences, plays, or other such before or after school hours activities.

Ok, let's say I agree with that, what do we do in the meantime, while we try to figure out the root causes, because that will take time. What do we do against the madmen amongst us, now? When he/she chooses to enter the next school, and keep in mind just how quickly the Sandy Hook incident occurred.

This is not progress. This just shows how ass fucking backwards the US is. Progress would be when Americans don't have the urge to go shoot up a school.

 

 

 

This.

 

Point taken, what's your alternative solution to stopping a mass murderer already in the act of his crime, and reasonably stemming future occurrences?

I treat this the same as the 9/11 truthers, sure there is some odd stuff in there, but coming to a conclusion, and then looking for evidence pointing to that conclusion, is generally unscientific. Furloaf, that's an interesting theory, and the media has been guilty of worse.

Handguns are no defense against long guns. If they want guns in schools, they better find a way to get a rifle in there.

 

A handgun, or a few, is many times better than nothing though, and could hold off an assault till help arrived, scare someone off, or otherwise make a difference.

As much as I support carry in schools, it is a sad undeniable fact of probability that a carrier will eventually have an incident that will get the indignant left into "We told you so" political soap-boxing mode. That must be a point that pro-carry supporters explain, and understand. Unfortunately, if an incident is deterred without violence, say the shooter simply picks another target, and nothing ever happens, you can't track that, or use it to support your argument. Those who choose to carry must also understand the firearm in their possession is their responsibility, and that they will personally be held to it.

I'm really sorry for your loss.

Very cool build, welcome.

I honestly don't give a shit if someone chooses to be neutral on gun control, that's certainly within the scope of their rights. If you oppose gun rights that's all fine and dandy too. If you try and force me to register so some liberal shitrag can publish my address for every would be thief, burglar, or invader, you will be ignored(although sadly my CHL is public record I believe). If you come to my home to disarm me,things will go badly, and that's the last thing I would ever want. I want to work, feed my family, and be left the fuck alone.

He did very well in a hostile environment.