US Gun laws are "License to murder"

Oh get it, you're an Obama lover, it all makes so much more sense now.

So doppel, you would put having armour piercing ammo for your pop gun ahead of the future prosperity of the United States. This makes me wonder if all Americans are as selfish as you, or is it just the rednecks?

I need a distraction from work so...

The question of why is gun crime more prevalent in areas with stricter gun laws? if you're a criminal and you have a choice between committing a crime on person A who has a gun and person B who has no gun who would you choose? I know it's simplistic but guns will only be declared by honest people so in areas with stricter gun control, honest people get rid of them while criminals bring them in from states with looser gun laws. As with all crime, it's about not geting caught and they're used to that already.

As for criminals having guns. Well if all the honest people have them, when criminals break into their houses (preferably when no one is home) what do you think the first things to go are? TV's or Guns? What's of more use to them?

Whileever America allows states to make up their own minds on gun control, there will be little change in gun related voilence. If gun control was national all the honest people would have no guns and criminals would find it extremely difficult to access new guns and slowly but surely, gun crime will drop.

You sure like to throw terms around to scare people don't you Stone. Sadly your rants really show shallow your knowledge is on the topic.

I'm not sure why you think the NRA is so intent on selling more guns. Do you think they're trying to corrupt the country or something? Have you bothered to read their mission statement? You love to bring up the NRA, but I'll be honest with you, I rarely listen to, or read any of their material, nor am I a member. I don't have anything against them, but I tend to prefer to make up my own mind not take everything from one source.

We've gone over the farce that Clinton's "Assault" weapons ban was. And yes, the potential for Obama to bring back a similar ban is ridiculous, and scary, which is why everyone is buying their guns now before some more poorly thought out legislature comes rolling through the pipeline, like is already in the works.

The fact that you say we're "behaving like children because he might take away our toys" shows how little you understand about the concepts I've been trying to explain to you for the past 900 some posts. And apparently you don't really have any interesting in trying to understand my (our) point of view.

"Armor piercing ammunition"? What type are you talking about? If you didn't know already, pretty much any hunting round out there will already punch through body armor like butter, are you calling that 'armor piercing?' You've already shown your inability to understand the sport side of shooting. All you can see is hate and fear. You also buy into the terrible definition of 'assault weapon' that the (clinton) ban, intoduced. Arguing these things are pointless with you Stone, you pump fear and paranoia into all of your posts, and will attack anyone and everyone that dares speak against your beliefs.

Or am I wrong? Do you actually have some intention of learning, or at least trying to understand an opposing viewpoint?

i briefly read into this out of curiosity, and i dont understand why the definition of "assault weapon" is terrible, nor why the act was a farce, or why a similar ban is "rediculous" and "scary". would you care to elaborate a bit?

Trying to discredit me won’t work Lurch. Even the UN wants to de arm America.



Lurch the NRA sells more guns because it’s good for membership and business. Like they have to pay for Wayne La Pierre’s million dollar salary, and many business use the NRA to sell more guns by playing on the emotion of the second amendment card. And while you may not be a member, you propagate all the NRA myths. It’s difficult to believe anyone living in America is free from NRA brainwashing, let alone be in a position make up their own mind about guns. Like how do you think the “on demand” legislation travelled through all the States? Do you think it just happened? .lol:



Assault weapons on the street is a farce, and they should be banned!



Lurch, there is nothing to understand. You guys are out of control. You consider bans on semi automatic weapons more important than the future of your country. As Doppel said, you guys defining your masculinity through the size of your guns, and that’s about as sensible as the pro gun argument gets.



Lurch, hunting animals with semi automatic assault weapons and armour piercing ammo is not sport, it’s slaughter. Or is that what you call hunting in America?

Anyhow, the question was why do you need armour piercing ammo for hunting? If most of your ammo will punch through armour then perhaps it should be banned. Makes no sense, having kids running around with semi automatic assault weapons and armour piercing ammo. It’s a wonder more people aren’t killed. Perhaps that’s what the NRA is worried about. If you want more info then you can check their NRA-ILA website.

Hey, I’m not the one living in fear. At least I can leave my home with out having to carry an arsenal of guns with me to feel normal. And where are those WMD???



Lurch, there is nothing to understand while you think it is acceptable for civilians to have semi automatic assault weapons and concealed handguns, so they can shoot other people because they “deserve to die”.

heh where do you get the idea that armour piercing ammunition is common in the united states? Full metal jacket rounds are common, and at high enough caliber they are capable of piercing armour, but they are not armour piercing ammunition, armour piercing ammunition have tungsten steel or depleted uranium cores, and are not common. Full metal jacket ammunition is common because it doesn't jam guns easily and it doesn't foul up barrels, and btw it does less damage to a person then soft tip rounds, which are banned by the geneva convention in warfare. You would prefer people were limited to soft tip rounds?

as far as the assault weapons ban, I find it a bit odd you can own assault weapons in the states, here we have stricter rules then that, but some points of the ban seem kind of arbitray, like saying you can't own a pistol grip or a gun with a flash supressor. Their are numerous types of flash supressors, and many of them don't do anything besides direct the muzzleflash away from the end of the barrel for reasons of safety and so it doesn't blind the person shooting the gun. It doesn't make the gun silent, or reduce the flash in anyway, it just directs it in a managable direction.

Realisticly I don't see the purpose of many of the banned guns. Generally they compromise things that make a firearm useful for sport/hunting to accomadate characteristics that make them good for combat. Like a ar-15 fires 5.56 ammunition that is ideal for combat situations because of it's light weight and small size allowing for high capacity magazines, but as far as hunting and sport shooting, it's inferior to many types of guns/ammunition types. And for self defense, a shotgun is superior to any of the banned guns anyways.

Personally, couldn't we just go back to compound bows and bolt-action rifles for hunting? What fun is using a big ass semi-auto assault rifle with .44 cor bon ammunition and a x12 scope?

The fact that you can by semi-autos and assault rifles as a civilian is a ridiculous idea. That gives every single person an easier chance to kill. Honestly, if most guns were banned, besides hunting guns and hand firearms reserved for people who would require them, it'd eventually lower the homicides. You're more likely to kill a family member with your own gun than the actually robber him/herself.

funny, you two canadians are basically saying the way australias firearms laws are set up is much more sensible, although im not sure if you know thats what you're describing, and i'd have to agree with you!

what are the laws in Canada?

our laws are a lot less strict then australia. Basicly unless you have a firearms restriction or a history of mental illness (of a violent or really unstable nature) you need to write a test to get a fire arms certificate (which is not very challenging, you prove you know firearms safety and have a basic shooting ability, which allows you to rifles and shotguns rather their semi-automatic pump action or bolt action. They have to be over 18 inch's and length and they must have a ammo capacity of 5 rounds (with some exceptions as some ww2 era guns that are really common in canada have 8 and 10 rounds magazines, such as the m1 garand and the leenfield rifle.)

Hand guns are pretty strictly prohibited, very few people legally own hand guns in canada.

we also have a gun registry which you were required by law to comply with, but it's recently been abandoned for everything but handguns due to the excesive cost to tax payers and no clear benefits)

Majestik, semi automatic assault weapons are AK’s, Uzis and M16 military weapons that are set to fire every time the trigger is pulled, rather than continuous fire. Bill Clinton banned them from use by the general public. However, there was a sunset clause. The NRA lobbied Bush and the ban lapsed. Sensible people don’t want military assault weapons on the streets, so the NRA suspects assault weapons might be banned again. And there has been a rush to buy them. For more info see NRA Myths



I got my information from the NRA. However, I think even the NRA is confused on this one. And it seems to have gone over Lurch, who is usually well informed on gun matters. I think the NRA is saying if they can’t have armour piercing ammo, then most ammo will be banned. In the amendment cited by the NRA ad, Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA) wanted to close a loophole in the existing Federal ban on “cop killer bullets” - armor-piercing ammunition. See NRA "Hunter" Ad Truth Check Falsehoods Similar to Past Attacks on Senator McCain

Lurch, as to the NRA mission statement, the fact that Ted “tanty”Nugent is tipped to become the next NRA president says it all. See Ted Nugent Seeks To Become President Of NRA People should know that he threatened then Senators Obama and Clinton during Democratic primary. Warning some of Ted’s language is disgusting.

Woah woah WHOAH.
Stone why are you feeding the trolls? You should know better.

Good point about long arms, great info.

The problem with the gun registration laws falling apart are that the studies used to discredit them are done on a modern stage and not a future stage. Sure putting a number on a gun isn't going to stop someone from using it brutally, but all that the number does is give data to the people in charge when that does happen so we can track what exactly went wrong. Someone obviously either dropped the ball on this one or yoinked it out of the way in a Charlie Brown//Lucy fashion.

As for the bow comment, some people still use crossbows for murder here just because they are almost completely silent and are essentially the same thing-- move a piece of metal into the body of someone else.

Lev, the other thing about the bow is the level of skill and training required. Zen in the Art of Archery by Eugen Herrigel is an excellent book on this subject.

Does it cover crossbows?

Lev, it depends. The training is more like "There is no Spoon" as in the Matrix.



Here are a couple of is an interesting bit’s from the following piece on the possible assault weapon ban:

Gun sales in the U.S. are in a steady decline. In an attempt to sell more AK-47 and AR-15 type assault rifles gun makers are calling them "black rifles" apparently this makes them a little more “cuddly” and a little less “killy”. I wonder what part of the market they are targeting with the “evil black rifle” campaign?

NRA Members Spontaneously Combust

“According to National Rifle Association Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre, gun owners are uniting in "political spontaneous combustion".

In the most recent edition of the NRA's America's 1st Freedom magazine, LaPierre cites a "tsunami of Second Amendment consumerism" in the wake of the election of Barack Obama and his appointment of Eric Holder as Attorney General. Says LaPierre, "Americans are speaking with their wallets--buying firearms, accessories and ammunition in quantities never seen before," driven by fear of "Obama's hostile gun-ban agenda."

The scary part is that most of the gun-shopping Krooks participating in this alliterative buying spree are those simply adding new military style weaponry to an existing arsenal. Over the past few years the gun industry has become increasingly dominated by manufacturers selling only AK-47 and AR-15 type assault rifles (newly christened "black rifles" by gunmakers to make them a little more cuddly and a little less killy), new high-powered handguns ranging from revolvers with the penetration power of rifles to AK-47 pistols, to anti-armor 50 caliber sniper rifles. Don't believe me? Pick up a copy of Shotgun News and compare the number of gun ads for "traditional" hunting rifles (a handful) to those for assault rifles (all the rest). Military-style weapons are the guns that are flying off the shelves and into the homes of people frightened about the "change" that an Obama Administration represents.

(Left unstated by the NRA is that this short-lived sales peak will, if history is any gauge, be followed by a predictable sales slump, and gun ownership in the U.S. will continue its steady decline.)”

What I mean is, when you mentioned me in your comment it confused me because I didn't understand what it had to do with my point, not sure if one of us is just missing something though.

Lev, I think it was just a comment on bow’s in general.

My reasons for not liking Obama have nothing to do with ammunition. And if you think he is going to save America you are dead wrong.

No, they aren't Uzis AK's and M16s. You really are ignorant.

Wow, all he did was make a few changes to that rifle and even though it was exactly the same working components it now only in look was different.

Oh and the fact that it was more easily hidden, lighter to carry and even was able to throw down on the ground with great stability a much more versatile combat weapon.



A question unjaded by my personal opinion, in the comparison he made in the beginning, whats the difference in the amount of rounds each can carry? The first had a much smaller clip than the second two.

Show me where I said that you slanderous liar.

You can put a bi-pod on almost any firearm. That wood finish is just as robust as the plastic. If someone really wanted to cause trouble they could shorten the barrel, a folding stock is hardly military.

As for the rounds, you can have a bigger magazine. But anyone who has ever shot will tell you the clip size does not matter, I could shoot 1x 30 round clip literally a few seconds quicker than 2x 15 round clips.

But reloading puts you at more risk of being shot back at, does it not? A constant stream of fire means you're the one up top firing your weapon, having to duck down may mean your opponent may well be aiming directly where your head will pop up from your hiding space, rather than taking cover?

The wood finish isn't heavier, making it less portable and more difficult to wield in a combat situation?

Folding stock, shortened barrel, bipod. Now you're talking. How many people do you think we could hurt with that setup? Especially if we set up our terrain properly?

the AWB that has everyone so wound up in the states banned guns under a certain length with folding stocks. Which I don't really think the public needs. Regardless of the porential liability, the potential legal usefulness is questionable. I find the usefulness of a 30 round clip questionable to. or a 15 round clip. You say it makes no diffrence but it does, especially since you can fire off 30 rounds faster then it takes to reload the next 30 rounds. effectivly makeing it a lot more powerful in combat then a rifle with a 15 round clip, and a hell of a lot more powerful then a rifle with a 5 round clip. If I lived in the states I wouldn't want to buy a silly compact rifle anyways, I don't see what appeals to people so much about inferior rifles. Although if you look at youtube it seems to be full of videos of people going to the range shooting as fast as they can at targets at 200M or less. Which I think is kind of funny, with the price of ammunition what it is I would be getting the most fun out of my buck shooting at more challenging ranges makeing my shots count, but americans are obsessed with firepower, not skill.

I agree banning bayonet lugs, pistol grips, and other nonsensical things is a pretty ridicilous and quite a bit of bad law makeing considering the difficulty of makeing any type of gun legislation stick in the united states.

I'd like to point out that the second amendment was made in the intent that America must maintain a strong militia just in case the British decide to invade...

Hate to break it to you guys, but I don't think they're coming.

I mean, they might... but even then you guys have military and police, best in the world right? So don't you think that if you guys STILL need protection even after all that there might be another cause for the issue, in which case shouldn't all the gun money be used to fix that?

so according to that video, actual assault weapons (as in weapons that will fire until the clip is empty simply by holding down the trigger) are already illegal for the public to own?

i still wouldnt say that a similar ban is "scary" though, just more useless political action.

As I said Doppel, you guys defining your masculinity through the size of your guns, and that’s about as sensible as the pro gun argument gets.



Eloquent as ever Dopple, such a way with words.

Your quote about American males measuring their their masculinity by the size of their guns comes from the School Shooting thread. That’s the thread where you suggest firearms are necessary for population control, if you can’t remember.




That's like saying you need a gun because you don't have any balls. Which is much the same as measuring your masculanity by the size of your gun.

Honestly, it's like you guys are all "so living in fear" you just can’t think clearly anymore.

And no where in there do I say anyone is more manly for having a gun. I said get a gun and grow some balls, not get a gun so you can grow some balls. You my friend, just like to twist everything into something else for YOUR sake. I am curious why you had nothing to say about the video, just going to ignore that post aren't you. Go ahead, roll around in your ignorance.

No, not according to that video, the law is the law, he just breaks it down for people like Stone.

A true assault weapon is one that fires rounds until you let up on the trigger, aka fully auto, aka machine gun. These guns are illegal for a civilian to posses.

A semi-automatic, is not an assault rifle, but had been dubbed one by the media in an effort to make the world more scary, again for people like Stone. A semi-auto is one trigger pull, one round. These are legal for civilians to own.

The "assault weapons ban" is just a bunch of political non-sense. Real assault weapons have always been banned, they like to put that word on the bill to make it sound like gang-bangers are machine gunning up cop shops, which has never been the case.

And for a lot of us, it IS scary, because the bill effectively takes away almost every long gun. It is also scary because our democracy is a mess, and that the voices of the people are no longer being heard, and tyranny is on the horizon.