oh8sti Posted January 19, 2013 Report Share Posted January 19, 2013 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sol740 Posted January 19, 2013 Report Share Posted January 19, 2013 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Karacho1647545492 Posted January 19, 2013 Report Share Posted January 19, 2013 What is an assault rifle? bushmaster .223 model xm15-e2s so whoever said that an "AR" was not used is correct... "assault" is just a word with little definitive meaning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oh8sti Posted January 19, 2013 Report Share Posted January 19, 2013 Im just saying if an AR was not used, we wouldnt be having obama cram this bullshit down our throats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FourString Posted January 19, 2013 Report Share Posted January 19, 2013 bushmaster .223 model xm15-e2s so whoever said that an "AR" was not used is correct... "assault" is just a word with little definitive meaning. The point behind my question (borderline rhetorical) is that these are military and/or civilian firearms. The term "assault" rifle has always bothered me; especially when people say that "AR" means "assault rifle". However, I do like when someone calls a magazine a clip. That's just free advertisement of their ignorance, and I'm able to immediately discredit any opinion they have made, or will make, at that point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forrest Gump 9 Posted January 19, 2013 Report Share Posted January 19, 2013 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. Yup, chipping away one part at a time. First assault rifle. Next, rifles and shotguns. Then handguns.....shit, I'm buying cannons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orion Posted January 20, 2013 Report Share Posted January 20, 2013 It makes me sick that the liberal left used the death of these kids as a pedestal to gain control over guns. The liberal left would say that it makes them sick that it took something like this for our government to get control of the gun issue. *shrug* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1fast5gp Posted January 20, 2013 Report Share Posted January 20, 2013 bushmaster .223 model xm15-e2s so whoever said that an "AR" was not used is correct... "assault" is just a word with little definitive meaning. The bushmaster is a sporting rifle. AR15 =/= assault rifle 15.. lol Just a FYI. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2011SVT Posted January 20, 2013 Report Share Posted January 20, 2013 This is how it works. Britain's 'common sense' firearms laws through 2007 (courtesy of the BBC): The right to bear arms was guaranteed in the 1689 Bill of Rights, in which the new King William of Orange enshrined a series of rights for his subjects - Catholics were famously excluded. This was enshrined in common law during the early years of the US, and later informed the second amendment of the US constitution, which explains why the right to bear arms remains so strong a factor in America. 'Driving factor' Meanwhile back in Britain - where hostile natives and rogue bears - were less of an issue, few people took up the right to carry arms. But there remained no legal restrictions on gun ownership throughout the Victorian era. Victorian crime image Gun laws were almost non-existent in Victorian time In 1870 a licence was introduced for anyone who wanted to carry a gun outside their home. But there were no restrictions on keeping a firearm indoors. Mild restrictions came into force with the 1903 Pistols Act which denied ownership to anyone who was "drunken or insane". It also required a licence for firearms with a barrel shorter than nine inches - what we nowadays refer to as handguns. Prior to World War I there were a quarter of a million licensed firearms in private hands across the country. But after soldiers returned from the trenches the government became concerned about the number of weapons they had brought home with them. The establishment's fears were heightened by the rise of socialist and anarchist movements and the 1917 Russian revolution. The 1911 Sidney Street siege in east London - which ended with a bloody gunfight between police and a gang of Latvian anarchists - underlined the dangers. Further restricted The result was the 1920 Firearms Act, which introduced a registration system and allowed local police forces to deny a license to anyone who was "unfitted to be trusted with a firearm". Restrictions were tightened with the 1937 Firearms Act, which banned most fully automatic weapons. The 1967 Criminal Justice Act required licenses - but not registration - for shotguns. Hard on its heels, the 1968 Firearms Act consolidated existing laws and gave the Home Office the right to set fees for shotgun licenses. Two tragedies nine years apart were to see the law further restricted. Following the Hungerford massacre in August 1987 - when Michael Ryan killed 16 people and himself with two semi-automatic rifles and a handgun - pressure was put on the government to tighten the law. Hungerford gunman Michael Ryan Fresh laws followed Michael Ryan's killing of 16 in Hungerford The result was the Firearms (Amendment) Act 1988, which banned semi-automatic and pump-action rifles; weapons which fire explosive ammunition; short shotguns with magazines; and elevated pump-action and self-loading rifles. Registration was also made mandatory for shotguns, which were required to be kept in secure storage. Even stricter controls were introduced after the 1996 killings in Dunblane, when Thomas Hamilton murdered 16 primary school children and their teacher with four legally-held pistols. The Conservative government drew up legislation banning handguns above .22 calibre. But following their general election victory, Labour introduced the Firearms (Amendment) (No. 2) Act 1997, which outlawed .22s as well. More recently, in response to a series of high-profile shootings, the Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 was introduced. This made it an offence to manufacture, import or sell realistic imitation guns; doubled the maximum sentence for carrying an imitation gun to 12 months, and made it a crime to fire an air weapon beyond the boundary of any premises. It also increased the age limit for buying or possessing an air weapon from 17 to 18. And that's how you go from an absolute right of the people 1689 to zero rights in 2007. Since 1968 in Britain, self defense has not been recognized as a valid reason to request a gun license. Great Britain now has the highest violent crime rate in the EU and one of the highest in the industrialized world, and is effectively a "surveillance society" that Orwell would have easily recognized as his fiction come to life. All done one "common sense" restriction and one sensational opportunity after another until nothing is left. It seems harsh but there really are two choices here. Either our rights are God given and recognized in the bedrock of our governing documents and doctrine or they are not. The words "shall not be infringed" mean what they say or is everything is subject to a vote? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty2Hotty Posted January 20, 2013 Report Share Posted January 20, 2013 I'll bring this up, you can't say you support the 2nd Amendment, and add a "But XXX firearm or XXXXX rifle" into the mix. I saw no specifications on, The Right to Bear Arms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyM3rC Posted January 20, 2013 Report Share Posted January 20, 2013 I'll bring this up, you can't say you support the 2nd Amendment, and add a "But XXX firearm or XXXXX rifle" into the mix. I saw no specifications on, The Right to Bear Arms. Agreed. If I want to go out and buy a M2A1 I should be able to. And if I've got $1500 more to blow, I should be able to call up Saab and get an AT4 damnit! Seriously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buelliganx1 Posted January 20, 2013 Report Share Posted January 20, 2013 The bushmaster is a sporting rifle. AR15 =/= assault rifle 15.. lol Just a FYI. AR = Armalite the folks that designed the thing, it was a branch of an aircraft manufacturer, North American Aviation if I remember right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fubar231 Posted January 20, 2013 Report Share Posted January 20, 2013 Has anybody heard about some of this shit in this video. Its 30 minutes but it really makes you think, especially about all the facebook and other donation pages that were created BEFORE the shooting for the school/childrens familys. If you have the time i suggest you watch it, theres so much shady shit about this whole shooting situation that i could definitely see the government being a part of it to give them a reason to ban some style guns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wheezle Posted January 20, 2013 Report Share Posted January 20, 2013 Anybody pay close attention to the video of the trooper clearing the rifle? That is no AR-15, due to the side charging handle. All M-16/ AR-15 rifles have a rear charging handle not a side charging handle. I would say that rifle was a AK-47 or variant of. Watch closely at 9 sec where he grabs the charging handle with his right hand closed on the side of the rifle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nismopc Posted January 20, 2013 Report Share Posted January 20, 2013 Anybody pay close attention to the video of the trooper clearing the rifle? That is no AR-15, due to the side charging handle. All M-16/ AR-15 rifles have a rear charging handle not a side charging handle. I would say that rifle was a AK-47 or variant of. Watch closely at 9 sec where he grabs the charging handle with his right hand closed on the side of the rifle. That was cleared up in the link provided earlier... http://www.ct.gov/despp/cwp/view.asp?Q=517284 It was a Izhmash Canta-12 Gauge Shot gun... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
copperhead Posted January 20, 2013 Report Share Posted January 20, 2013 Agreed. If I want to go out and buy a M2A1 I should be able to. http://www.ridelust.com/zombie-stomper-1942-white-motors-m2a1-halftrack/ And if I've got $1500 more to blow, I should be able to call up Saab and get an AT4 damnit! Seriously. you could call up Saab but that phone would be ringing for a long time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Not Brian Posted January 20, 2013 Report Share Posted January 20, 2013 Way easier to get some kids together and place blame on evil guns than to bluntly point out the fact that crazies gon' craze. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboGoKart Posted January 20, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 20, 2013 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. IMO, this is probably the fact that bothers me the most (the liberal left part, not the AR statement-which I also agree with). If they are willing to capitalize on something as innocent as a bunch of children dying, it kind of makes you think what ELSE have they used to further their agenda. And therein, IMO, lies the heart of the issue. Also, why THIS school shooting? How many shootings occur every day in our nation, school shootings or other (gangs, hunting accidents, angry lovers, spur of the moment shootings, negligent discharges, etc.) and no one bats an eye or demands/implements a gun ban? And why now all of the sudden? And why was this new ban put into place BEFORE the final reports had come out? I find it very suspicious how quick this was put into effect, and just as suspicious that it occurred under/by a second term president. Which brings us back to the heart of the issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboGoKart Posted January 20, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 20, 2013 Way easier to get some kids together and place blame on evil guns than to bluntly point out the fact that crazies gon' craze. Lol yes. In almost all school shootings, mental health is the issue. Way to put a Dora the Explorer band-aid on a blown off limb, federal government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spectragod Posted January 20, 2013 Report Share Posted January 20, 2013 AR = Armalite the folks that designed the thing, it was a branch of an aircraft manufacturer, North American Aviation if I remember right. Actually, the original was a Stoner...... Linky................. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoner_63 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buelliganx1 Posted January 20, 2013 Report Share Posted January 20, 2013 Actually, the original was a Stoner...... Linky................. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoner_63 But he designed it while working for ArmaLite correct? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spidey2721 Posted January 20, 2013 Report Share Posted January 20, 2013 armalite built the first ones owned the design. went broke and sold the design to colt. colt kept the ar designation. they also made shotguns with the same ar designation. i sure you can wiki it too if ya like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.