Forums > Social Discussion > US Gun laws are "License to murder"

Login/Join to Participate
Page: 1...3233343536...44
FireTom
Stargazer

Member Since: 20th Sep 2003
Total posts: 6650
Posted:
Non-Https Image Link


[ed]I am going to update this OP as ppl who have not followed the discussion (in the past 2 years it is running now) cannot be bothered to go through all 50+ pages only to inform themselves about all the arguments brought forward. I hope it's allright with everybody.

Please patiently note that this is going to be a massive post that sum up all significant arguments that have been brought forward by both sides so far.

Thus: If you're bothered to read all the post, just scroll down to the bottom of it to get to the links and arguments - NEWEST information at the end of each section

Reading this post will keep you up-to-date with the current level of arguments brought forward - and you might not have to read all the 700+ posts.

If you have any new arguments that you find important to get included in this OP, please feel free to PM me at any time. Please note that I will only honor those arguments that you can back up with verifiable sources (quote your sources). I will *not* honor personal opinions as in 'I feel more comfy with a gun at my side' or in 'I feel horrified with guns present'. Feel free to post your opinions as you like *at the end of this thread*.

As this is a highly political issue, it will be almost impossible to keep this 'objective' and I will honor arguments of both sides, those who are pro and those who are against guns, regardless whether they directly come from the NRA or the Brady campaign.

The entire thread started like this:

Taken from: New York Times on August 7th

Originally Posted By: NYT
In the last year, 15 states have enacted laws that expand the right of self-defense, allowing crime victims to use deadly force in situations that might formerly have subjected them to prosecution for murder.

Jacqueline Galas, a Florida prostitute, shot and killed a 72-year-old client. She was not charged.
Supporters call them stand your ground laws.

Opponents call them shoot first laws.

The Florida law, which served as a model for the others, gives people the right to use deadly force against intruders entering their homes. They no longer need to prove that they feared for their safety, only that the person they killed had intruded unlawfully and forcefully. The law also extends this principle to vehicles.

In addition, the law does away with an earlier requirement that a person attacked in a public place must retreat if possible. Now, that same person, in the laws words, has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force. The law also forbids the arrest, detention or prosecution of the people covered by the law, and it prohibits civil suits against them.

Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the N.R.A., said the Florida law had sent a needed message to law-abiding citizens. If they make a decision to save their lives in the split second they are being attacked, the law is on their side, Mr. LaPierre said. Good people make good decisions. Thats why theyre good people. If youre going to empower someone, empower the crime victim.

The N.R.A. said it would lobby for versions of the law in eight more states in 2007.

In the case of the West Palm Beach cabdriver, Mr. Smiley, then 56, killed Jimmie Morningstar, 43. A sports bar had paid Mr. Smiley $10 to drive Mr. Morningstar home in the early morning of Nov. 6, 2004. Mr. Morningstar was apparently reluctant to leave the cab once it reached its destination, and Mr. Smiley used a stun gun to hasten his exit. Once outside the cab, Mr. Morningstar flashed a knife, Mr. Smiley testified at his first trial, though one was never found. Mr. Smiley, who had gotten out of his cab, reacted by shooting at his passengers feet and then into his body, killing him.

Cliff Morningstar, the dead mans uncle, said he was baffled by the killing. He had a radio, Mr. Morningstar said of Mr. Smiley. He could have gotten in his car and left. He could have shot him in his knee.

Carey Haughwout, the public defender who represents Mr. Smiley, conceded that no knife was found. However, Ms. Haughwout said, there is evidence to support that the victim came at Smiley after Smiley fired two warning shots, and that he did have something in his hand.

Prior to the legislative enactment, a person was required to retreat to the wall before using his or her right of self-defense by exercising deadly force, Judge Martha C. Warner wrote. The new law, Judge Warner said, abolished that duty.

Jason M. Rosenbloom, the man shot by his neighbor in Clearwater, said his case illustrated the flaws in the Florida law. Had it been a year and a half ago, he could have been arrested for attempted murder, Mr. Rosenbloom said of his neighbor, Kenneth Allen.

I was in T-shirt and shorts, Mr. Rosenbloom said, recalling the day he knocked on Mr. Allens door. Mr. Allen, a retired Virginia police officer, had lodged a complaint with the local authorities, taking Mr. Rosenbloom to task for putting out eight bags of garbage, though local ordinances allow only six.

I was no threat, Mr. Rosenbloom said. I had no weapon.

The men exchanged heated words. He closed the door and then opened the door, Mr. Rosenbloom said of Mr. Allen. He had a gun. I turned around to put my hands up. He didnt even say a word, and he fired once into my stomach. I bent over, and he shot me in the chest.

Mr. Allen, whose phone number is out of service and who could not be reached for comment, told The St. Petersburg Times that Mr. Rosenbloom had had his foot in the door and had tried to rush into the house, an assertion Mr. Rosenbloom denied.

I have a right, Mr. Allen said, to keep my house safe.


Taken from sbcoalition

Originally Posted By: sbcoalition

In Colorado, another state where this law has already passed, when Gary Lee Hill stood on the porch with a loaded rifle, he was afraid the people outside his home would attack him. That was what the jury heard in his murder trial. The jury foreman said that left them no choice but to find Hill not guilty of murder under Colorados Make My Day Law. Although Mr. Knott was in his vehicle, there was no credible evidence that Mr. Knott was leaving, the foreman wrote, adding that testimony showed some of the people were still outside in a car yelling at Hill.

Gary Hill, 24, was found not guilty of first-degree murder in the shooting death, in the back, of John David Knott, 19, while he was sitting in a car outside Hills home.

Chief Deputy District Attorney Elizabeth Kirkman stated, However, the way the Make My Day Law is worded, it allows for deadly force if the shooter reasonably believes the other person might use physical force against the home dweller. She said her office supports the Make My Day Law and respects the jurys decision. She also said, At the time he was shot, there was no imminent danger to the home dweller.

Trust me, wrote Bill Major of Colorado Springs, this will open the door for assaults and murders by those who will now accept this as an interpretation of the Make My Day Law.

I try this to become a comprehensive list, so please feel free to PM me.

Thanks for participating in this discussion, times and again posts get heated (as it is a highly sensitive AND political topic) please do not take criticism on your opinion personal. Usually it relaxes pretty soon.

You're entitled to your *opinion* - whatever it is - hence quote your sources please if you want your *arguments* get taken serious...

In the past 2 years we have collected data and facts from various sources. Please verify these arguments yourself and get informed at these websites:

Wiki on gun control
The second amendment of the US constitution, on "the right to bear arms"


Pro-guns

National Rifle Association USA
How to obtain a class III license
A 1995 DOJ's study on Guns used in Crimes
Microstamping opposition

(Please PM me your sources and the arguments they point at, I will include them here)

Anti gun

Brady Campaign
Informations on the NRA's board of directors
Website on comments of the NRA leaders
A UC study showing that microstamping is feasible but has flaws
Gun control network

(Please PM me your sources and the arguments they point at, I will include them here)

Scientific Studies on gun ownership and the resulting facts

Concealed handgun permit holders killed at least seven police officers and 44 private citizens in 31 incidents during the period May 2007 through April 2009 according to a new study

Harvard School of Public Health releases 2007 study that links guns with higher rate of homicide
Harvard School of Public Health releases 2007 study that links guns with higher rate of suicide
1999 Canadian study: "The rate of f...eightfold"
Utah medical library states that: "...uctivity."
Statistics on Teen homicide, suicide and... in 2004."

Articles in the news about guns, gun laws and accidents

USA Today on the expiry of the assault weapons ban
LA Times on bulletproof parks
CBS reports March 2008 that: "the U...in crimes"
A federal judge has stopped enforcement ...deadly weapons.
Violence Policy Center on CCW permit holders committing violent (armed) crimes
US weaponry spills into neighboring Mexico - across America

EDITED_BY: FireTom (1249974498)


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete Topic

Stone
Stream Entrant
Location: Melbourne
Member Since: 13th Jun 2001
Total posts: 2830
Posted:Originally Posted By: doppelgangerOh 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?



If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh

Delete

*Geo*
*Geo*

member
Location: Seoul, South Korea
Member Since: 15th Jul 2005
Total posts: 108
Posted:Originally Posted By: LurchI will ask one question that I've asked before many times, but I don't recall you ever even attempting to answer.

If gun control is the answer, why is gun crime (and violent crime in general) so much more prevalent in areas with less access to guns, and lower in areas where guns are more available?
Originally Posted By: LurchActually I wasn't talking about right to carry laws at all. I was talking about why cities like Washington DC, NYC, Boston, Chicago, Detroit.. all have strict carry laws, and are some of the most violent in the country. DC has all but banned private ownership of guns and confiscated thousands, yet they're still responsible for 80% of it's murders. As I've said a million times, CRIMINALS owning guns is the problem, not law abiding citizens.

In case you haven't noticed, violent crime has by in large been dropping in the US (as opposed to elsewhere) and gun ownership and right to carry laws have been loosening, because *some* people are beginning to see how useless they are.


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.


Delete

Lurch
Lurch

old hand
Location: Oregon
Member Since: 1st Nov 2003
Total posts: 929
Posted: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?


#homeofpoi -- irc.newnet.net Come talk to us we're bored frown

Warning: Please Do Not Jump On The Seals

Delete

Mr Majestik
Mr Majestik

coming to a country near you
Location: home of the tiney toothy bear
Member Since: 9th Mar 2004
Total posts: 4693
Posted:Originally Posted By: Lurch
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

You also buy into the terrible definition of 'assault weapon' that the (clinton) ban, intoduced.

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?


"but have you considered there is more to life than your eyelids?"

jointly owned by Fire_Spinning_Angel and Blu_Valley

Delete

Stone
Stream Entrant
Location: Melbourne
Member Since: 13th Jun 2001
Total posts: 2830
Posted:
Originally Posted By: LurchYou 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.

Trying to discredit me wont work Lurch. Even the UN wants to de arm America.

Originally Posted By: LurchI'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.

Lurch the NRA sells more guns because its good for membership and business. Like they have to pay for Wayne La Pierres 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. Its 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:

Originally Posted By: LurchWe'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.

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

Originally Posted By: -LurchThe 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.

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 thats about as sensible as the pro gun argument gets.

Originally Posted By: Lurch"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.

Lurch, hunting animals with semi automatic assault weapons and armour piercing ammo is not sport, its 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. Its a wonder more people arent killed. Perhaps thats what the NRA is worried about. If you want more info then you can check their NRA-ILA website.

Hey, Im 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???

Originally Posted By: LurchOr am I wrong? Do you actually have some intention of learning, or at least trying to understand an opposing viewpoint?

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.


If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh

Delete

railspinner
railspinner

journeyman
Location: canada
Member Since: 8th Oct 2008
Total posts: 99
Posted: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.


The less people know the more they believe

Delete

V_Regal
Lost in the Lights
Location: BC, Canada
Member Since: 16th Feb 2009
Total posts: 101
Posted: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.


Risen from the Ashes
The Phoenix shall rise in his royal flaire.
FIND YOUR DESTINY.

Delete

Mr Majestik
Mr Majestik

coming to a country near you
Location: home of the tiney toothy bear
Member Since: 9th Mar 2004
Total posts: 4693
Posted: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?


"but have you considered there is more to life than your eyelids?"

jointly owned by Fire_Spinning_Angel and Blu_Valley

Delete

railspinner
railspinner

journeyman
Location: canada
Member Since: 8th Oct 2008
Total posts: 99
Posted: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)


The less people know the more they believe

Delete

Stone
Stream Entrant
Location: Melbourne
Member Since: 13th Jun 2001
Total posts: 2830
Posted:Majestik, semi automatic assault weapons are AKs, 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 dont 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

Originally Posted By: railspinnerheh where do you get the idea that armour piercing ammunition is common in the united states?

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 cant 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 tantyNugent 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 Teds language is disgusting.


If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh

Delete

Lev
Firedance Philosopher
Location: Vancouver BC Canada
Member Since: 19th Jan 2009
Total posts: 79
Posted: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.


Delete

Stone
Stream Entrant
Location: Melbourne
Member Since: 13th Jun 2001
Total posts: 2830
Posted: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.



If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh

Delete

Lev
Firedance Philosopher
Location: Vancouver BC Canada
Member Since: 19th Jan 2009
Total posts: 79
Posted:Does it cover crossbows?

Delete

Stone
Stream Entrant
Location: Melbourne
Member Since: 13th Jun 2001
Total posts: 2830
Posted:Lev, it depends. The training is more like "There is no Spoon" as in the Matrix.



Here are a couple of is an interesting bits 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.)



If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh

Delete

Lev
Firedance Philosopher
Location: Vancouver BC Canada
Member Since: 19th Jan 2009
Total posts: 79
Posted: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.

Delete

Stone
Stream Entrant
Location: Melbourne
Member Since: 13th Jun 2001
Total posts: 2830
Posted:Lev, I think it was just a comment on bows in general.

If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh

Delete

Such
Such

Rancor
Location: Right Here
Member Since: 17th Sep 2008
Total posts: 253
Posted:Originally Posted By: StoneOriginally Posted By: doppelgangerOh 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?


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.


Human

Delete

Such
Such

Rancor
Location: Right Here
Member Since: 17th Sep 2008
Total posts: 253
Posted:Originally Posted By: Mr MajestikOriginally Posted By: Lurch
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

You also buy into the terrible definition of 'assault weapon' that the (clinton) ban, intoduced.

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?





Human

Delete

Such
Such

Rancor
Location: Right Here
Member Since: 17th Sep 2008
Total posts: 253
Posted:Originally Posted By: StoneMajestik, semi automatic assault weapons are AKs, Uzis and M16 military weapons that are set to fire every time the trigger is pulled, rather than continuous fire.

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


Human

Delete

Mother_Natures_Son
Mother_Natures_Son

Rampant whirler.
Location: Geelong, Victoria, Australia!
Member Since: 1st Aug 2007
Total posts: 2418
Posted: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.


hug

Delete

Such
Such

Rancor
Location: Right Here
Member Since: 17th Sep 2008
Total posts: 253
Posted:Originally Posted By: Stone
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 thats about as sensible as the pro gun argument gets.


Show me where I said that you slanderous liar.


Human

Delete

Such
Such

Rancor
Location: Right Here
Member Since: 17th Sep 2008
Total posts: 253
Posted:Originally Posted By: Mother_Natures_SonWow, 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.

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.


Human

Delete

Mother_Natures_Son
Mother_Natures_Son

Rampant whirler.
Location: Geelong, Victoria, Australia!
Member Since: 1st Aug 2007
Total posts: 2418
Posted: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?


hug

Delete

railspinner
railspinner

journeyman
Location: canada
Member Since: 8th Oct 2008
Total posts: 99
Posted: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.


EDITED_BY: railspinner (1235184318)


The less people know the more they believe

Delete

Lev
Firedance Philosopher
Location: Vancouver BC Canada
Member Since: 19th Jan 2009
Total posts: 79
Posted: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?


Delete

Mr Majestik
Mr Majestik

coming to a country near you
Location: home of the tiney toothy bear
Member Since: 9th Mar 2004
Total posts: 4693
Posted: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.


"but have you considered there is more to life than your eyelids?"

jointly owned by Fire_Spinning_Angel and Blu_Valley

Delete

Stone
Stream Entrant
Location: Melbourne
Member Since: 13th Jun 2001
Total posts: 2830
Posted:As I said Doppel, you guys defining your masculinity through the size of your guns, and thats about as sensible as the pro gun argument gets.

Originally Posted By: Doppel GangerShow me where I said that you slanderous liar.

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. Thats the thread where you suggest firearms are necessary for population control, if you cant remember.

Originally Posted By: Doppel ganger School Shootings thread Have you ever had to fend for yourself? Have you ever had to protect anything? I am, going to stop before I begin insulting you, I am just so sick of pansies that think what they think should be what everyone thinks. You can hate guns all you like, but when you try to take them from me, I'll put a bullet just there. Where the hell did the testosterone go in our society?

get a gun and some balls


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 cant think clearly anymore.


If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh

Delete

Such
Such

Rancor
Location: Right Here
Member Since: 17th Sep 2008
Total posts: 253
Posted: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.

Human

Delete

Such
Such

Rancor
Location: Right Here
Member Since: 17th Sep 2008
Total posts: 253
Posted:Originally Posted By: Mr Majestikso 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.

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.


Human

Delete

Such
Such

Rancor
Location: Right Here
Member Since: 17th Sep 2008
Total posts: 253
Posted:Originally Posted By: Mother_Natures_SonBut 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?

See this is what I don't get. No No and No. You guys are Bitching and moaning about school shooting and the like, but don't stop to think about what you are saying.

If your intent was to go somewhere and kill a bunch of people, you wouldn't go into it with some bullets and an empty clip, you would have multiple clips already loaded, so no no no. And if you were a school shooter, there wouldn't be any opposition for a while anyway, same as a bank, same as a store.

You guys like to think that gun battles go down here all the time, that is so untrue I want to scream. Almost all the deaths from guns are one sided. It doesn't matter what your clip size is or how heavy or concealed your weapon is, if you want to go censored things up IT DOESN'T MATTER. Do you really think the next school shooting is not going to happen because someone couldn't get their bi-pod on? Come on.

If the wood were difficult it wouldn't have been made in the first place, almost every AK has a wood body, and it's renown for combat. Again, do you really think someone is going to put robbing that bank on the back burner because their gun is a pound heavier? Wake up.

Do you really think that murders have been prevented because the potential perp said, "Gee, I can't fit this rifle under my coat because the stock doesn't fold?" Or does is take an extra smart criminal to just use a pistol. Open your eyes.

If someone wants to kill someone, they will do it even if they don't have any tac gear.


Human

Delete

Page: 1...3233343536...44

Similar Topics

Using the keywords [gun law* quot license murder quot] we found the following similar topics.
1. Learn > POI > Partner Poi > Partner Poi Suicides (aka Murder Suicide) *help/resource murder suicide   ...
2. Forums > US Gun laws are "License to murder" [1 reply]
3. Forums > weird laws [8 replies]
4. Forums > the NEW smoking laws [103 replies]
5. Forums > Know the score as regards the law?? [10 replies]

     Show more..