Obama after the Assualt Weapons Ban Already.

[LJ]

so you saying that getting into a gun fight with simple Pistol in your hand up gainst someone with an UZI or a MAC-11 would be cool with you?

The stupidity in this statement is astounding.

 

#1 we are NOT discussing AUTOMATIC weapons, if this was 1934 or 1986, maybe, but not right now in 2009

#2 You really have no idea what you are talking about.

[flounder1647545522]

so you saying that getting into a gun fight with simple Pistol in your hand up gainst someone with an UZI or a MAC-11 would be cool with you?

How is putting a the top speed of my car in my profile being hypocritical? How about your sig "Push your limits until you crash, then back off just a bit" Is that how you drive?

 

As usual, you have nothing to offer but just for fun. Like I said before, a Gun is a gun, sqeeze the trigger and it goes off. And as an FYI, Why are you bringing automatic weapons into the situation. That is not what this is about. In the same reference as what you just said, do you think a semi auto AR or AK is "cool" against an UZI or Mac-11? What point are you trying to make because your doing it extremely poorly? Your comparing apples to oranges. Yes my sig says push your limits until you crash then back off just a bit. And that is exactly what I do at the track. Im not arguing in support of the firearms ban, YOU ARE, but yet you have added nothing of any knowledge or understanding in any way shape or form.

 

Im waiting to see what your response is this time but based on your past replies, I imagine it will be something pointless, contradictory, and filled with zero knowledge what so ever

 

Your lack of knowledge but yet the continuing ability to try and argue the situation amazes me and everyone else in this thread. Youre a bit like the court jester. So far you are only here to make us laugh at your stupidity.

[Guest Hal]

The stupidity in this statement is astounding.

 

#1 we are NOT discussing AUTOMATIC weapons, if this was 1934 or 1986, maybe, but not right now in 2009

#2 You really have no idea what you are talking about.

 

Yeah.

 

BTW: I hate the law passed in 1934 (I cannot remember the name right now) as I'm sure you do.

 

Edit: Memory returns, the National Firearms Act.

[TTQ B4U]

I'm still waiting for you to take your wife's skirt off and shut the fuck up.

you like to tell people to shut up don't you? so do the kids on the play ground ya know. now I know where you get that.

 

The politicians are not fighting to solve the problem we have. They are fighting to keep guns like that out of the hands of people who would legally purchase them.

 

Lots of people involved in legal activities are charged with major illegal crimes. I think it's because they are onto how a small number of sources are legally providing guns to a large group of people, who are then in turn providing them to someone else.

 

Every time someone older starts getting pushed into a corner, they point out someone's age. Well guess what, I bet I have more experience with guns than you do.

 

Good....now use your experience with guns to go get your point across to those that matter. I've not seen you post about that yet, so all your useless knowledge and experience isn't helping your cause in Washington. Instead all I see is you throw around a bunch of internet chatroom banter and sarcasm to point out your rights.

 

There is no real solution for taking the illegal weapons off the street. How can you possibly think that gun control will take illegal guns off the street?

 

So you give up and let those in charge hear a man with no solution bitch? That won't get you very far. You don't like what those in charge are doing so you shoot down their ideas but offer no better suggestion? Guess what's coming....another ban....and you admitted defeat already.

[LJ]

Yeah.

 

BTW: I hate the law passed in 1934 (I cannot remember the name right now) as I'm sure you do.

 

Edit: Memory returns, the National Firearms Act.

 

Meh, NFA isn't bad, because it actually regulating something that IS more dangerous (ie full auto and explosives) its the civilian ban in 1986 that pisses me off.

[Adam]

Look, I'm not saying ban guns or particular guns, I'm no expert on assault weapons or guns and don't need to be nor care to be. What I am saying is that these more advanced guns do not belong in the hands of just anyone. The weak, ignorant, poor, uneducated, irresponsible do not "need" these guns and I think we'll all agree, the complete opposite of them aren't necessarily the ones our public officials are concerned with.

 

I just want to point out on your list of "people who shouldn't own a gun" are the WEAK and the POOR.

 

I thought class 3 permits were difficult and expensive to obtain now days? (especially the part about the ATF being allowed to come in whenever they want to your house to check) Correct me if I am wrong

 

I also want to point out that for no other reason I want to buy an AR to target shoot out to 600 yards with a safe reliable gun that isn't a cannon and is fun to shoot. Not to defend myself not to hunt with, no other reason, other than as a hobby. Like when I invite all of this forum (well senior members only) to come to my dads property to spend the weekend, shoot the entire weeked, camp out in the country, cook out and enjoy people who enjoy the same thing I do. Explain to me where this is wrong, and why I shouldn't be allowed to purchase an object that lets me enjoy the fact that I work hard enough and am responsible enough to take the money that I didn't steal or break the law to get and purchase something that I have no intention of hurting someone else with.

 

I mean seriously you keep arguing hypothetical things, and gun supporters argue the other hypothetical things, so when that happens you have to bring statistics into the argument, and I guarantee the statistics will not help you out in the arguement.

 

are you just trying to pick a fight or are you trying to seem like you haven't actually looked into the issue past the surface of it? You know I can really understand the other side of the coin on this, people are scared of people owning something that they don't understand and believe can hurt them, gun advocates feel the same way they just go about solving that problem in a slightly different way

[Guest Hal]

you like to tell people to shut up don't you? so do the kids on the play ground ya know. now I know where you get that.

 

 

 

Lots of people involved in legal activities are charged with major illegal crimes. I think it's because they are onto how a small number of sources are legally providing guns to a large group of people, who are then in turn providing them to someone else.

 

 

 

Good....now use your experience with guns to go get your point across to those that matter. I've not seen you post about that yet, so all your useless knowledge and experience isn't helping your cause in Washington. Instead all I see is you throw around a bunch of internet chatroom banter and sarcasm to point out your rights.

 

 

 

So you give up and let those in charge hear a man with no solution bitch? That won't get you very far. You don't like what those in charge are doing so you shoot down their ideas but offer no better suggestion? Guess what's coming....another ban....and you admitted defeat already.

 

I like to tell morons to shut up, yes. I like that you used another little zinger with age there. You must have a pro writing your insults:rolleyes:

 

If they were on to a small number of sources, they would shut them down. It's pretty clear that you have done almost no research on this subject. People providing illegal weapons, are not getting them legally to begin with in most cases. Why don't you go take a couple classes on weapons trafficking.

 

I don't need to tell you what I do to preserve my rights. At this point we are very limited in what we can do. Everyone should exercise their voice with a vote. Everyone should write letters to their congressmen if they feel their issue is important. I will not admit defeat because as a whole, we have not been defeated.

 

Those in charge are like you, uneducated on the subjects they are trying to work with. There is nothing that can solve trafficking issues like this. My god, do a little research before you come to an argument.

[ODoyle]

so you saying that getting into a gun fight with simple Pistol in your hand up gainst someone with an UZI or a MAC-11 would be cool with you?

 

When is this ever going to happen? Those are FFL III weapons you cant own those legally with out months of red tape among other things and if you can pass that you are responsible enough to own such a gun, Not to mention the cost envolved in the permits and purchasing the gun. I only see CRIMINALS using these weapons for something other than recreational shooting or home protection.

 

I mean to say I only see criminals using these weapons in ways they shouldn't

[Guest Hal]

are you just trying to pick a fight or are you trying to seem like you haven't actually looked into the issue past the surface of it? You know I can really understand the other side of the coin on this, people are scared of people owning something that they don't understand and believe can hurt them, gun advocates feel the same way they just go about solving that problem in a slightly different way

I like this paragraph. I completely understand where the fear comes from. I do think that fear can be lessened with actual knowledge of the subject at hand. Knowledge is the real king of this world, I believe that. Money is a figure head but, knowledge rules all. Unfortunately for us, the media provides a disproportionate amount of "eduction" to the masses. People seem to lack the ability to research anymore.

[Fiji ST]

The AR platform is customizable in countless ways, and can be built to perform one specific purpose very well. For example, and AR with a 24" barrel and decent scope can be an ideal coyote or varmint rifle. Accurate, low recoil, and readily available follow-up shots. A handgun will not suffice.

 

Its a hobby like anything else, much the same you put wheels on your car you can customize your rifle. The manufacturers whom make parts for the AR/M-16 are plentiful, offering a variety of personalization you can add to the rifle.

 

Then there is the "what-if" conspiracy theorist extreme survivalist type. If mayhem is unleashed and you need to defend the life yourself and your family and protect your food and belongings a handgun will not suffice. This could be of a civil magnitude, or an invasion from another country where militia is needed.

 

Once could also argue the civilian market generates revenue to fund R&D of better equipment used in the military.

 

The second amendment helps prevent corruption and maintains semi-honest government.

 

Do I personally feel I NEED to own one? Not really.

Do I have the RIGHT and WANT to own one? Absolutely.

Do some people NEED a so-called "assault rifle?" Probably.

 

THANK YOU! Finally, an insightful answer.

 

 

And the there is no better explanation for why people would "need" assault weapons than because they WANT to. Whats so hard to understand about that. I dont understand why thats not a good valid explanation for the situation. And if shit ever hits the fan and we do have to defend ourselves from the government, everybody in this thread will rise to the occasion and will be prepared to do so except for you and that fiji fella.

 

So sorry I asked for an explanation. I just hope you'll save me when the govt. attacks.

[Guest Hal]

When is this ever going to happen? Those are FFL III weapons you cant own those legally with out months of red tape among other things and if you can pass that you are responsible enough to own such a gun' date=' Not to mention the cost envolved in the permits and purchasing the gun. I[b'] dont see anyone other than CRIMINALS using these weapons for recreational shooting or home protection.[/b]

 

Knob Creek Machine Gun Shoot. Tons of people who legally own Class III weapons and shoot them purely for their own enjoyment.

[Guest Hal]

Meh, NFA isn't bad, because it actually regulating something that IS more dangerous (ie full auto and explosives) its the civilian ban in 1986 that pisses me off.

 

The act itself wasn't too bad, the actions that followed were what I really hate. The 1986 ban is completely unconstitutional IMO.

[flounder1647545522]

As far as Class III items are concerned. Suppressors are a safety device in my opinion. All of you that believe suppressors are hollywood quite have no clue. My hearing is extremely important and anything that can quite down the report of a firearm to avoid causing me hearing damage is a safety device. And by the way, anyone that can legally buy a firearm from a dealer/store can legally get a class III firearm.

[ODoyle]

Knob Creek Machine Gun Shoot. Tons of people who legally own Class III weapons and shoot them purely for their own enjoyment.

 

I edited.

[street pilot]

 

I mean seriously you keep arguing hypothetical things, and gun supporters argue the other hypothetical things, so when that happens you have to bring statistics into the argument, and I guarantee the statistics will not help you out in the arguement.

 

Too late, see post #93 :grin2:

[Wonderboy]

Well since age is apparently relevant to this subject, Im going to say that obviously my 22 years of experience on this earth have allowed me to grasp and understand this whole situation better than you. And would people stop using the "assault" rifle BS. Every gun is designed for assaulting and they can all be just as dangerous as any other weapon. Im giving up now because you will never be enlightened to the feeling of, "I have this weapon because I can". Its as simple as that. Good night.

[V8 Beast]

http://content.ytmnd.com/content/f/4/8/f485b0dbf692e92019f8fee9cff8490a.jpg

[ODoyle]

http://content.ytmnd.com/content/f/4/8/f485b0dbf692e92019f8fee9cff8490a.jpg

 

 

Please stay on topic.

[V8 Beast]

Please stay on topic.

 

Shut up before I ban you the old school way....

 

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d105/CRISSCAT75/gun.jpg

 

[Guest Hal]

Shut up before I ban you the old school way....

 

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d105/CRISSCAT75/gun.jpg

 

 

Reported.

[V8 Beast]

Hal, its not a threat if its followed by a smiley :p :p :p :p :p (and you actually know the person)

[Guest Hal]

Hal, its not a threat if its followed by a smiley :p :p :p :p

 

I'll kick you in the nuts if we ever meet in person.

 

[V8 Beast]

I'll kick you in the nuts if we ever meet in person.

 

 

Wrong smiley... newb. It has to be a happy smiley, not a confused one. Starting a new thread to cuss you out so the gun people dont get upset..

[cinergi]

I do believe Pelosi might actually be helping the gun folk.... I don't want to speak too soon, but here's the update as far as I can tell:

 

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/pelosi-tosses-cold-water-on-reviving-assault-weapon-ban-2009-02-26.html

[GonneVille]

Tim, I've met you once or twice. I got the impression of an intelligent, rational person. Wow, did I get let down by first impressions.

Here, I'll make it simple;

Criminals have guns. I have guns. To protect me against criminals with guns, the government bans a long list of guns that happens to include every gun that I own legally. I comply, turn in my guns, and a week later, I get shot by a criminal who, because it is in the nature of criminals not to obey the law, has NOT turned in his banned guns.

 

This is the reality of any gun ban. It will only take away the guns from those people who choose to obey the law.

My brother's Mosin Nagants would have been banned if the last gun ban bill had passed. They're high-power military rifles, easily able to completely pierce an engine block or body armor. Of course, they're also balky bolt-action guns designed in the 1880s that use a relatively expensive and hard to find round, and I'm pretty sure that no Mosin Nagant has ever been used in a crime, but that's completely besides the point, isn't it? It's a high-power, military-style rifle, so it obviously criminals are all flocking to get them and murder people with them.

Here's the problem with every gun-control law written in the last thrity years; They're all, every single one, written by people who are SCARED of guns, and people who are ignorant of the use of guns.

 

Do I have a solution? No. But I have a few ideas that would help.

 

1) ARM. Introduce open carry in every state. Introduce castle law in every state. Introduce samaritan laws in every state. Make it not just a right to carry a gun, but a duty to act in defense of yourself and others.

 

2) EDUCATE. Introduce MANDATORY gun safety classes starting in middle school, and elective marksmanship programs as part of physical education. Offer competitive shooting as an extracuricular activity. Make basic armed self defense an elective course, and basic unarmed self-defense a mandatory PE course.

 

3) PUNISH. Let's get real, there's thousands of people rotting through five and ten year sentences for a couple joints worth of marijuana. Legalize it, tax the hell out of it, and use the extra revenue and prison space to increase sentences on gun-related crimes. If you commit a crime using a gun, kiss ten years goodbye, first time. If you injure someone with a gun during the commission of said crime, 20 years, minimum. Murder=death penalty. And make prisons something to truly fear again. Rehabilitation does NOT work.

 

My perfect future is a country where every law-abiding citizen carries a handgun that they have been trained to use, and any criminal that survives using a gun to commit a crime can count on being in a hell-hole for so long they'll forget how to USE a gun.