General [M]ayhem

Go Back   General [M]ayhem > Real Time Sub-Forums > Armageddon and Survival
Register Members List Mark Forums Read [M]erchandise Calendar

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Caelum
 
+ YouTube Video
ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/19/opinio...hts/index.html
Quote:
John Lott, economist and gun-rights advocate, has extensively studied mass shootings and reports that, with just one exception, the attack on U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson, Arizona, in 2011, every public shooting since 1950 in the U.S. in which more than three people have been killed has taken place where citizens are not allowed to carry guns. The massacres at Sandy Hook Elementary, Columbine, Virginia Tech and the Century 16 movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, all took place in gun-free zones.
Guess what happened during the last AWB. Oh yeah Columbine.
And to your testing and fees related to buying an ar15 or what not: this guy murdered his mom and stole her guns. He went to Dicks sporting goods and didnt want to wait the waiting period so was denied the purchase of a gun. So in your world of permits and licensing this mom bought her guns legit and her son killed her for them. So what good would those licenses and permits have done?

BTW Cuomo is a fucking moron. "You dont need more than 10 rounds to kill a deer!" Well duh. That's why in most states its illegal to hunt with a rifle that hold more than 5. Yeah 5 bullets, not 10 not 30, but restricted to 5. There is already a law in place for that you jack ass. And if I want to hunt with my AR308 with a magazine modified to only hold 5 rounds then I fucking will.

ETA:
+ YouTube Video
ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.

/ETA


Gun control is all about control. The government is telling every citizen they are no longer responsible enough to exercise one of their constitutional rights. You are not responsible enough to protect yourself because your life isn't worth it but lets wait for them to have their PSDs give up their guns shall we.
Diane Feinstein has a concealed carry permit. It was issued to her in the 70s because she was the target of a terrorist group. She had the only carry permit in the entire city of San Francisco, the 1 and only 1. Because her life is more important than the regular citizen. She thinks so little of the regular guy she will make laws to accommodate her and penalize others.
http://usliberals.about.com/od/liber...nFeinstein.htm
Quote:
Senator Feinstein is a staunch gun control advocate. Despite her stance, in the 1970s, she obtained a concealed firearms carry permit, and carried a handgun with her. A CCW permit was then rare in California, and was the only such permit in San Francisco. At the time, she was the target of a terrorist group that had shot out all the windows in her home. She no longer carries a gun.
+ YouTube Video
ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.

Except for her guns of course. She has a similar mindset as this bitch from New Hampshire
http://www.examiner.com/article/new-...s-media-silent
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Governm...-Conservatives
Only me and those like me deserve all the freedoms we're entitled to. Un fucking believable!

I also like how in your eutopian world police are first responders. YOU are a first responder! YOU! The police and paramedics are second. They get there AFTER the crime has been committed.
http://now.msn.com/atlanta-mom-shoot...e-face-5-times
Good thing she didnt wait for the cops or she'd be dead. Shot him 5 times in the face and he lived! I bet she wished she had a larger capacity gun.
+ YouTube Video
ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.

This mall shooter saw a concealed carrying person aiming at him and instead of continuing his spree decided to instead kill himself. The permit holder made what he thought was a good decision. As a carry permit holder myself that is something to remember. You are responsible for the bullet legally and financially wherever it may go. So if he felt he would miss he made a good decision. But just the site of the guy cause the shooter to stop his spree and kill himself.

Also lets not forget that JFK was killed by a bolt action rifle. One that would now be considered a hunting rifle. Jack Ruby then killed Oswald with a 38 revolver. Then Robert Kennedy killed with a 22 revolver, Reagan was shot with a 22 revolver. John Lennon was killed with a 38 revolver. So its funny how gun control people think lower capacity means less violence. Its funny how completely idiotic that is.

So you're saying 18 year olds aren't responsible enough to own a firearm? The average age of the military is 19 and I'll let you in on a secret, those 19 year old get to carry guns, a lot. Oh its the training you say that makes them responsible? Well its up to parents then to educate their children on how to properly use firearms then. Does it happen all the time? No but mass shootings are hardly the norm either. I can say for sure that there are more parents teaching their kids how to use guns and respect guns than there are mass shootings.

Something extra
http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/the-giant...ook-reporting/

Gun purchases have been going up over the last many years. And when Obama got elected there was as we know a MASS surge in gun purchases and guess what happened with all those guns...NOTHING! The country did not erupt in a crazy wild west scenario of shooting sprees. Nothing happened. Because people aren't crazy. There are crazy people but villifying the gun instead of the man who does the act is the wrong way of thinking.
+ YouTube Video
ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


http://www.infowars.com/veiled-threa...ot-alex-jones/
The funny part is the tweets at the end. People hope the next shooter will go to an NRA meeting. "Why go to schools? Go to an NRA meeting" They never will because the people there are armed! Why attack a hard target when you can attack a defenseless one??!!!

I can't imagine you'll read or watch all of this. And talking to someone who has the wrong opinion is pointless anyway. Even if you take in all of these pieces of data as fact it wont change your mind. The second amendment is not about hunting. It is about the right to personal protection. Personal protection from criminals and protection from the government. It is in place to always leave in the hands of the citizens the means in which to over throw the government. In fact the Revolutionary War started with the British trying to take possession of powder shot and arms. The first act of gun control and it started a war that gave rise to our nation. Taking away Americans guns is about as unAmerican as it comes. All you have to do is look at any of the founding fathers stance on guns and the second amendment. It is plainly obvious what their intent was with it.


I'll leave with this cause its the Nuge and he's a lunatic

Last edited by Caelum; 01-10-2013 at 06:04 AM..
Old 01-10-2013, 05:54 AM Caelum is offline  
Reply With Quote
#31  

Advertisement [Remove Advertisement]

Caelum
 
Old 01-10-2013, 07:27 AM Caelum is offline  
Reply With Quote
#32  

Thermo1223
 
Thermo1223's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apsalus View Post
You didn't clarify. "Yes" who should what?

Your posts are hard to follow. By treating a gun with great potential to kill, less people will use them to kill other people? What are you trying to say?

Apparently you missed the part where I don't care.

What would you do if a car was running you down? Stand there and just say "fuck it"?

Why are you so hung up on the idea that you must own an evil black rifle to be toe-to-toe with a robber/crazy/etc?

I am not going to go in circles with you. I'll just leave it at that.

Apologies around, didn't mean to shit the thread with my opinion since you were talking about AR's around the AWB.
__________________
'09 Subaru Forester XT - Hauler
'14 Scion xD - It's cute...ugh
'04 VW Jetta Wagon TDI=FAILWAGON
Range - GTFO god :rolleyes:
Old 01-10-2013, 07:56 AM Thermo1223 is offline  
Reply With Quote
#33  

Slacker
 
Slacker's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thermo1223 View Post
I see where you are going with this and before you do stop...think, then type. I should not nor anyone else in the US have to arm myself with militaryesque hardware to defend myself & family from a robber/crazy/etc. A simple handgun & shotgun is all that is needed. You want one then a mandatory age limit, psych eval., steep license fee, anything to stop what happens when one idiot does indeed "ruin" it for you. So sorry you'll have to stick with hunting rifles now or should 20 more kids have to die for you to believe it?

I have almost 10 years of experience with an M-16 or M-4 and probably a few thousand rounds over those years. In comparison I've put maybe 50 rounds through handguns in my entire life. When it comes to defending my family I want an AR-15 because I have muscle memory with that weapon. I would be far more effective with a weapon I am intimately familiar with.
__________________
[M]ilitary [M]ayhem
Ambition is a poor excuse for not having enough sense to be lazy
Old 01-11-2013, 08:27 PM Slacker is offline  
Reply With Quote
#34  

Thermo1223
 
Thermo1223's Avatar
 
Well you are trained and I see no reason why a person of the armed forces couldn't own the same(similar) firearm they used in conflict as a recreational device. Military training teaches a lot more than just use of the weapon. I personally think it makes you more responsible for you actions in general. I mean you would want to stay sharp with it your downtime between deployments or even after discharge. Now obviously there will be limits to that buy few I imagine. That is a valid reason, one I'd support

I personally just don't see the argument that we NEED an AR15 style weapon to protect ourselves as citizens. It is more of a want than need. A normal person will feel just as safe with a handgun as they would with a semi-auto rifle.
__________________
'09 Subaru Forester XT - Hauler
'14 Scion xD - It's cute...ugh
'04 VW Jetta Wagon TDI=FAILWAGON
Range - GTFO god :rolleyes:
Old 01-13-2013, 07:31 PM Thermo1223 is offline  
Reply With Quote
#35  

?psalus
Apsalus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thermo1223 View Post
Well you are trained and I see no reason why a person of the armed forces couldn't own the same(similar) firearm they used in conflict as a recreational device. Military training teaches a lot more than just use of the weapon. I personally think it makes you more responsible for you actions in general. I mean you would want to stay sharp with it your downtime between deployments or even after discharge. Now obviously there will be limits to that buy few I imagine. That is a valid reason, one I'd support
Retired military personnel allowed to use the same weapons that they used in combat, for fun? Are you listening to yourself? With all due respect to those that serve our country, they don't need automatic weapons and grenade launchers any more than a non-serviceman does.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thermo1223 View Post
I personally just don't see the argument that we NEED an AR15 style weapon to protect ourselves as citizens. It is more of a want than need. A normal person will feel just as safe with a handgun as they would with a semi-auto rifle.
So you aren't going to "go in circles" with me, but you're going to continue repeating yourself without actually explaining your rationale. Nice.
Old 01-13-2013, 08:54 PM ?psalus is offline  
Reply With Quote
#36  

Rancidpunk666
 
Rancidpunk666's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thermo1223 View Post
Well you are trained and I see no reason why a person of the armed forces couldn't own the same(similar) firearm they used in conflict as a recreational device. Military training teaches a lot more than just use of the weapon. I personally think it makes you more responsible for you actions in general. I mean you would want to stay sharp with it your downtime between deployments or even after discharge. Now obviously there will be limits to that buy few I imagine. That is a valid reason, one I'd support

I personally just don't see the argument that we NEED an AR15 style weapon to protect ourselves as citizens. It is more of a want than need. A normal person will feel just as safe with a handgun as they would with a semi-auto rifle.

An ar15 only looks like a m4/m16

It only fires 1 round per trigger pull just like every other weapon we can own with out jumping through legal hoops paying additional taxes and a minimum 6-10k for a full auto weapon.

How many criminals are going to pay 6,000 for a weapon, GO THROUGH THE BACKGROUND CHECK that takes nearly 6 months to kill mass amounts of people. That's right, they are not..

In like 99.99999999999% of all crimes it's usually stolen guns and/or something that costs less than 200 bucks... Really bro, gotta stop listening to the establishment and check out the FBI stats for yourself.
__________________
._--_|\
/ииииииии\
\_.--Senator Date Rape
.......v
Grandpa Motors (GM) pussrods and leafsprings
Old 01-14-2013, 04:03 AM Rancidpunk666 is offline  
Reply With Quote
#37  

Rancidpunk666
 
Rancidpunk666's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thermo1223 View Post
Yes they should, that way you have a direction to point the finger in.

Gas pump fires don't randomly kill people, swimming pools don't randomly kill people, and yes you could kill one person maybe with a screw driver. You need a license to drive a car what getting one for a gun is such bad idea? They both are equally deadly.

I see where you are going with this and before you do stop...think, then type. I should not nor anyone else in the US have to arm myself with militaryesque hardware to defend myself & family from a robber/crazy/etc. A simple handgun & shotgun is all that is needed. You want one then a mandatory age limit, psych eval., steep license fee, anything to stop what happens when one idiot does indeed "ruin" it for you. So sorry you'll have to stick with hunting rifles now or should 20 more kids have to die for you to believe it?

You fail to see the connection...

How about the fact you are 900 times more likely to be killed by your doctor than a gun

Or that you are 620 times more likely to be killed by a doctor than a homicidal mass shooter?

I mean, that's a huge amount times more... Which is why I refuse to go to any kind of doctor, if I get cancer and die before it can be detected, great I'd rather a quick semi painful death than a death of radiation poisoning.
__________________
._--_|\
/ииииииии\
\_.--Senator Date Rape
.......v
Grandpa Motors (GM) pussrods and leafsprings
Old 01-14-2013, 04:10 AM Rancidpunk666 is offline  
Reply With Quote
#38  

gribly
 
gribly's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thermo1223 View Post
Yes they should, that way you have a direction to point the finger in.

Gas pump fires don't randomly kill people, swimming pools don't randomly kill people, and yes you could kill one person maybe with a screw driver. You need a license to drive a car what getting one for a gun is such bad idea? They both are equally deadly.

I see where you are going with this and before you do stop...think, then type. I should not nor anyone else in the US have to arm myself with militaryesque hardware to defend myself & family from a robber/crazy/etc. A simple handgun & shotgun is all that is needed. You want one then a mandatory age limit, psych eval., steep license fee, anything to stop what happens when one idiot does indeed "ruin" it for you. So sorry you'll have to stick with hunting rifles now or should 20 more kids have to die for you to believe it?

Fuck off with the car . You can go buy and own a car without any sort of license or anything. The licensing is to use it on public roads and help pay for those roads. Nothing at all to do with guns.

Also, do some research. WHERE ARE ALL THESE KIDS GETTING RANDOMLY KILLED!?!?!?
Old 01-14-2013, 06:37 AM gribly is offline  
Reply With Quote
#39  

Rancidpunk666
 
Rancidpunk666's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by gribly View Post
Fuck off with the car . You can go buy and own a car without any sort of license or anything. The licensing is to use it on public roads and help pay for those roads. Nothing at all to do with guns.

Also, do some research. WHERE ARE ALL THESE KIDS GETTING RANDOMLY KILLED!?!?!?

and to add on to that, what about people who have suspended licenses for whatever reason and kill someone in an crash?

and... to put into more perspective, at least here in Ohio, if I am driving with an expired tag and I get rear ended or in any kind of accident it that I would not be at fault, guess what it's now my fault because I shouldn't have been there...

God our country is so fucked up.
__________________
._--_|\
/ииииииии\
\_.--Senator Date Rape
.......v
Grandpa Motors (GM) pussrods and leafsprings
Old 01-14-2013, 06:42 AM Rancidpunk666 is offline  
Reply With Quote
#40  

Caelum
 
I think the better car analogy is any car that is used for anything other than its designed purpose. This is something I'm trying to eloquently piece together as a retort to the argument that a gun is designed for 1 thing only. This is sort of my rough draft

An SUV with 1 person in it. Ban it.
A truck not hauling anything in the bed. Ban it.
Most importantly any car designed to go fast. Ferrari, Lambo, Impreza, Civic R, Enzo, M3, R8, S4, Mustang, Camero, Charger, etc. Ban them! And ban the show top gear for encouraging lawless behavior!

Those vehicles are designed for 1 thing and 1 thing only. To break the law.
Oh they're used for something other than breaking the speed limit you say? How interesting.
My gun has not only never been used to commit a crime, it can actually be used as a deterrent to crime.
Can anyone say that about a Corvette? Can anyone pick up a corvette and hit a rapist with it?
You're going to take it to the track one day? Yeah sure, just like I'm going back to war with my guns. At least I may actually have a use for my gun one day in legal self defense whereas you will never be able to legally use your muscle car to its full potential on any regular old day

I read an article posted by a doctor about how he treated a kid one time who had been shot in the face because he was fucking around with a shotgun and the piece was meant to really tug at heart strings and he was so torn up about it. I wonder how many teenagers he's tried to put back together because of speed related crashes in their brand new mustangs that they were negligently driving and abusing their driving privileges.
Old 01-14-2013, 02:50 PM Caelum is offline  
Reply With Quote
#41  

Rancidpunk666
 
Rancidpunk666's Avatar
 
Make your own

http://defcad.org/
__________________
._--_|\
/ииииииии\
\_.--Senator Date Rape
.......v
Grandpa Motors (GM) pussrods and leafsprings
Old 01-14-2013, 02:51 PM Rancidpunk666 is offline  
Reply With Quote
#42  

Caelum
 
Haha yeah. I saw one the other day made of plywood sealed in polyurethane
Old 01-14-2013, 08:24 PM Caelum is offline  
Reply With Quote
#43  

Thermo1223
 
Thermo1223's Avatar
 
Well I guess since we are all off track now it doesn't matter...

Apsalus:

Since you misunderstood what I meant it is plainly obvious that anyone with half a brain wouldn't want any person with access to a grenade launcher or full automatic weapon outside a military situation. I said similar as so he could retain some of that "muscle memory", a semi-auto in his situation would be ideal.

The current debate just furthered my long standing belief that weapons that hold high amounts of ammunition should not be available to the public.

I know people die randomly everyday with little to no cause through various means, should be ban it all? No. It means we need to try harder to prevent as much as we can.

Rancid don't be a fuckin idiot and try an equate doctors & radiation treatment to this argument, god you're fucking stupid. My Aunt just survived chemo & radiation and is now cancer free. So we should have just let her die? Fuckin twit. It is your opinion but don't be stupid about it.

Edit:

Also to put some perspective on myself I would be the first one to cry against more control. I was caught & plead guilty to illegal use at a shooting range in PA State Gamelands. You are not allowed to have more than 3 rounds in a rifle or 6 in a handgun at any time on PA Govt. property. I ended up with a $150 fine and why I don't know but he wanted shell casings from all the involved weapons. I don't even know if they were mine because the range wasn't kept that clean. I broke the law willingly and paid for it but what is practice if you are only half loading a handgun. I think it is stupid but not complying with a State Game Warden is like telling a State Trooper to go f himself. Ya I didn't need to go to jail.
__________________
'09 Subaru Forester XT - Hauler
'14 Scion xD - It's cute...ugh
'04 VW Jetta Wagon TDI=FAILWAGON
Range - GTFO god :rolleyes:

Last edited by Thermo1223; 01-15-2013 at 11:58 AM..
Old 01-15-2013, 11:44 AM Thermo1223 is offline  
Reply With Quote
#44  

?psalus
Apsalus
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thermo1223 View Post
Well I guess since we are all off track now it doesn't matter...

Apsalus:

Since you misunderstood what I meant it is plainly obvious that anyone with half a brain wouldn't want any person with access to a grenade launcher or full automatic weapon outside a military situation. I said similar as so he could retain some of that "muscle memory", a semi-auto in his situation would be ideal.
It sounds like you need to pick your words more carefully. It's hard to guess that "the same firearm used in conflict" really means a semiautomatic variant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thermo1223 View Post
The current debate just furthered my long standing belief that weapons that hold high amounts of ammunition should not be available to the public.
Would the handguns, that you feel would be just as effective as an evil black rifle in a personal defense situation, be limited to six or so rounds? You are aware that 30 round handguns and extended magazines for handguns exist, yes?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thermo1223 View Post
I know people die randomly everyday with little to no cause through various means, should be ban it all? No. It means we need to try harder to prevent as much as we can.
By restricting a tool that some psycho misuses and punishing all of the law-abiding owners? I hope that you get something that you enjoy taken away from you, for some inane reason, that you can never get back.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thermo1223 View Post
Rancid don't be a fuckin idiot and try an equate doctors & radiation treatment to this argument, god you're fucking stupid. My Aunt just survived chemo & radiation and is now cancer free. So we should have just let her die? Fuckin twit. It is your opinion but don't be stupid about it.
You misunderstood what he said and outed yourself as an emotional basket-case.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thermo1223 View Post
Also to put some perspective on myself I would be the first one to cry against more control. I was caught & plead guilty to illegal use at a shooting range in PA State Gamelands. You are not allowed to have more than 3 rounds in a rifle or 6 in a handgun at any time on PA Govt. property. I ended up with a $150 fine and why I don't know but he wanted shell casings from all the involved weapons. I don't even know if they were mine because the range wasn't kept that clean. I broke the law willingly and paid for it but what is practice if you are only half loading a handgun. I think it is stupid but not complying with a State Game Warden is like telling a State Trooper to go f himself. Ya I didn't need to go to jail.
You knowingly violated that law because "it is stupid". Fascinating. Tell us more about how a law like this should blanket the entire Union.
Old 01-15-2013, 06:56 PM ?psalus is offline  
Reply With Quote
#45  

Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:27 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.