Home Main Category Second Amendment/Politics

Gun control laws!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

1356

Replies

  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,533 Senior Member
    31919079.jpg
    Overkill is underrated.
  • ThatMattGuyThatMattGuy Senior Member Posts: 666 Senior Member
    It has always been

    THEIR SIDE: Nobody needs an assault weapon!!!

    OUR SIDE: This is no an assault weapon as it does no have the following blah blah blah and no gun never did hurt nobody on its own!

    Everyone has heard it and its getting kinda old.....

    We need to shift this to a mental health issue that the gun haters care nothing about. Parents have little options for unstable and disturbed children. If you know of an unstable adult that is possibly dangerous....who do you call? If he has committed no crime yet he can not be held. There is no punishment for parents who hid unstable children who have acted out with violence. The gun grabbers are not interested in the real answers to these problems. WE also have our own set of problems WE need to deal with as I mentioned before. WE need to decide what to do about it BEFORE the Brady bunch makes those decisions for us. Bans and restrictions are coming. We can not continue to use these old arguments to fight it.
    The poster formerly known as '69MercCougar
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 16,132 Senior Member
    Like I said I have no idea what the answer is. But it is foolish to pretend these people do not exist.
    Does there really have to be an answer? There are stupid ugly people out there having stupid ugly children with no means to support them. There are people driving that really shouldn't be. There are people voting that have no clue what they are voting about or whom for. There are crazy old men driving monstrous white Ford Thunderbirds with gas sucking V-8 engines. There are idiots like me posting stuff on the internet. There are people out there that are drinking themselves to death. All kinds of people are doing stuff that they really have no business, or should not be doing.

    A free society is not a utopia. Bad things are going to happen, and when we start restricting freedoms to stop those bad things from happening, we cease being free.
    Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it.
    -Thomas Paine
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 17,216 Senior Member
    Jermanator wrote: »
    Honestly, I find the 30 round magazines cumbersome and prefer the 20's-- the 30's stick out too far for me. I do keep an AR for a HD rifle. The 20 round magazine gives me 6 triple-taps and change. That said, let me ask you a question? How many rounds does your Glock hold? Why do you need so many?

    As a hunter, the state keeps me at 10 rounds or less, but I prefer bolt rifles for that anyway. Now if you are CPJ, you might need a beta-mag.

    I like twenty rounders as well...I haven't reloaded my coyote rifle in a couple of years now...
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • 5280 shooter II5280 shooter II Senior Member Posts: 3,923 Senior Member
    It has always been

    THEIR SIDE: Nobody needs an assault weapon!!!

    OUR SIDE: This is no an assault weapon as it does no have the following blah blah blah and no gun never did hurt nobody on its own!

    Everyone has heard it and its getting kinda old.....

    Our problem is that we don't simplify it for the ignorant.......

    "Assault weapons are already banned and/or highly restricted.....what's your point stupid?"
    God show's mercy on drunks and dumb animals.........two outa three ain't a bad score!
  • ThatMattGuyThatMattGuy Senior Member Posts: 666 Senior Member
    Jermanator wrote: »
    Does there really have to be an answer? There are stupid ugly people out there having stupid ugly children with no means to support them. There are people driving that really shouldn't be. There are people voting that have no clue what they are voting about or whom for. There are crazy old men driving monstrous white Ford Thunderbirds with gas sucking V-8 engines. There are idiots like me posting stuff on the internet. There are people out there that are drinking themselves to death. All kinds of people are doing stuff that they really have no business, or should not be doing.

    A free society is not a utopia. Bad things are going to happen, and when we start restricting freedoms to stop those bad things from happening, we cease being free.

    Yes there does. Because the anti gunners only have one answer. Total gun bans. Our side can not get together on anything. Heck I talked to a guy yesterday. I had done over $1000 in FFL tranfers for his ever growing collection of Remington Wingmaster 870's when I worked at the pawn shop and his opinion was "I don't about them assault machine gun things I just buy Remington pump shotguns". We have groups of gun owners that do not care about the issues we face. We have groups of gun owners that make us look bad, we have groups of gun owners that are unwavering loud in your face supporters of the 2A ect....How money times have we here on the forum piled up on some goofy newbie and run his butt of here because he did not fit our forum standards?

    Anti gunners are committed to one goal...We are all over the damn place. This is not going to end well for gun owners.
    The poster formerly known as '69MercCougar
  • FiveSevenFiveSeven Member Posts: 289 Member
    Anti-gunners don't have an answer. They have a delusion, a delusion that no one having guns will make them safe.
    Only the optimists suggest that the future is uncertain. The pessimists have done the math.
  • ThatMattGuyThatMattGuy Senior Member Posts: 666 Senior Member
    Our problem is that we don't simplify it for the ignorant.......

    "Assault weapons are already banned and/or highly restricted.....what's your point stupid?"

    Or maybe we are trying to pretend some guns are not what they really are and we look like idiots for doing so.......I am sorta splitting hairs when trying to show the difference between my Century Arms UZI and the Israeli military version. I do a good job of speaking the company line but really they are pretty much the same except for a feature or two. Who knows maybe we will come out of this ok ONE MORE TIME....but this time I feel more defeated.
    The poster formerly known as '69MercCougar
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 8,473 Senior Member
    Ouch.. Really? So you think its okay that someone who has never shot a gun before and doesn't have a clue about firearms is able to all of a sudden get an AR or AK?????

    Damn right I do.

    It comes down to this: I personally would rather run the slim daily risk of being shot accidentally by an incompetent, shot maliciously by a lunatic, or run over by a drunk driver, or by an untrained driver driving a high-performance vehicle beyond their skill level than to have my rights to shoot or drive abridged, curtailed, or eliminated merely because the possibility of that happening exists.

    The key in my world is to properly punish those who screw up.
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 17,216 Senior Member
    Bigslug wrote: »
    The key in my world is to properly punish those who screw up.

    THAT!.....
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • JeeperJeeper Senior Member Posts: 2,954 Senior Member
    Bigslug wrote: »
    Damn right I do.

    It comes down to this: I personally would rather run the slim daily risk of being shot accidentally by an incompetent, shot maliciously by a lunatic, or run over by a drunk driver, or by an untrained driver driving a high-performance vehicle beyond their skill level than to have my rights to shoot or drive abridged, curtailed, or eliminated merely because the possibility of that happening exists.

    The key in my world is to properly punish those who screw up.

    :that: Exactly. I'll take my chances. Just don't mess with MY rights.

    Luis
    Wielding the Hammer of Thor first requires you to lift and carry the Hammer of Thor. - Bigslug
  • glockman0422glockman0422 Member Posts: 216 Member
    Jeeper wrote: »
    :that: Exactly. I'll take my chances. Just don't mess with MY rights.

    Luis

    Unfortunately the fact is that politicians are already trying to take away our rights. And if we leave it up to them they're going to come up with some really ridiculous Rules that are not going to be good for anybody. That's why I'm saying that we should get together and come up with a solution that will favor both sides. Because whether we like it or not these people are going to do something about it whether it's right or wrong it does not matter they are set on doing something About our gun laws. I know it sucks but unfortunately it seems to be the reality these days.
  • FiveSevenFiveSeven Member Posts: 289 Member
    Yeah.....you should read up on how comprising worked out for Neville Chamberlain and the rest of Europe.
    Only the optimists suggest that the future is uncertain. The pessimists have done the math.
  • NNNN Senior Member Posts: 24,843 Senior Member
    Do you easily get upset?

    Do you jump at loud noises?

    Do you ever feel apprehensive?

    Oh my, you must have PTSD
    and you all know what is next!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 16,132 Senior Member
    .... and the ones that legitimately need help suffer in silence because to admit that there is a problem is to forfeit their rights.
    Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it.
    -Thomas Paine
  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    Teach wrote: »
    OK, Sam- - - - -what magazine capacity would you be comfortable with in your .45? 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 rounds? Would you be able to defend yourself adequately with a single shot?

    Aren't you buying into the "Let's do something- - - - - -anything- - - - -" train of thought? How effective was the previous 10-year ban on magazines with more than a 10-round capacity?
    Jerry

    Good question, Jerry, and maybe I didn't 'splain myself that well -- I'm not PERSONALLY concerned about hi-cap magazines and such. My pro-gun feelings are too deep.

    What I am asking these questions about is purposed to formulate some type of reply that can be worked out with the anti-gun folks. What I want us to do is to kick around ideas that might be applicable, some way to deal with it.

    For me, I'm guessing that a private self defense scenario will involve 4-5 rounds max, last maybe 15 seconds, and be within 25 feet, most likely. Which is why I reach for my .45acp pistol if needed. This is of course what we discuss here all the time.

    I absolutely KNOW that for a law abiding citizen, having a 30-round AK or AR is no more dangerous than having a single shot rifle or small caliber revolver. I don't doubt this myself, at all. I'm playing devil's advocate here, is all, and filtering through some discussion topics that we might find ourselves coming to as we chat with friends and associates (those who are less pro-gun that we). Is all.
  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    cpj wrote: »
    Need has zero to do with it. Do I need one? Not really. Do I want one? Not particularly. Should that prevent me from purchasing one? Nope.
    It comes down to want. Do you need more than one pistol in your apartment? No. Then why do you have more than one? Because you wanted it. Is it hurting anyone just sitting in your safe? Of course not. Just like any other gun or gun part is not going to magically start killing people.
    Edit: I was referring to the magazines, not the AR in the above post.

    cp, I agree with you completely. I'm however tossing thru my fevered brain some sort of ideas that might find themselves into the upcoming "national debate" (actually it'll be a national pillorying) and see what we can best do to find a way thru the mess and come out with a set of new laws that aren't too restrictive.

    Why do I "need" a big V8 T-Bird? Well, I don't need one, but I sure like driving it. (and abiding with all speed laws, naturally, ha ha). But it's still legal. What the law doesn't let me do is to take a vintage Porsche 969 and drive it on US streets. Or drive a McClaren CanAm in race condition down the Interstate -- even if it would be fun. There are restrictions.

    There will likely be restriction on guns too, new ones. How can we best tweak those so they tend to "make sense" to the anti-gun people and yet provide us with needed gun rights?
  • FiveSevenFiveSeven Member Posts: 289 Member
    So you want to give up a little freedom for some safety? Gun restrictions only make sense to governments. It will never be enough, so why are you pussyfooting around the issue. The debate over gun control will be lost to us through compromise.
    Only the optimists suggest that the future is uncertain. The pessimists have done the math.
  • yotesalotyotesalot New Member Posts: 18 New Member
    I've been thinking, trying to come up with even one situation where it works out better; for the victoms of a crazy sob; where being unarmed is the best idea... Well.. I got nothing...

    A R's for hunting? Well, when you call in as many as five to seven yotes at a time.... Works for me!! called in three yesterday morning, one made it over the hill without incident.. It turned one on the stretcher to two.. I have reloaded my 20rounder once already this year.. For what I do.. The AR is the best tool in my box..

    What about the media giving those idiots who want to inflict fear and pain on society fresh and new Ideas (not to mention fame and notoriety).. No fault there??!! You could argue that when A1 was written there was no internet.. The internet is a game changer..Bla bla bla...

    Crazy sob's are gonna do what crazy sob's do!! and the only counter measure is to be prepared for the worst..
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 27,457 Senior Member
    Speaking of compromise:

    This is a cow:

    Fourcrosses_Centurian_Pine.jpg

    This is a cow after Congressional compromise:

    wildebeest_mgr-4244g.jpg
      I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer”
    ― Douglas Adams
  • 1965Jeff1965Jeff Senior Member Posts: 1,648 Senior Member
    Don't worry, uncle joe biden knows what is best for all us. The lemmings will keep running towards the cliff, letting Nancy do their thinking for them, accepting the gov't cheese and other entitlements so we can sleep safely tucked away from all the lunatics mad at mommy for committing them to an institution. I feel better already.
  • MichakavMichakav Senior Member Posts: 2,817 Senior Member
    CaliFFL wrote: »
    We are doomed. Gun owners telling other gun owners on a freaking 2A forum, what they should or shouldn't be allowed to own. : puke :

    Was thinking along those lines also.

    I also believe that mental health education and treatment should get a boost.

    Another AWB will do nothing. Already proven.
  • TugarTugar Senior Member Posts: 2,292 Senior Member
    So far what I am hearing is that there will be no compromises. We just let Congress dictate how they are going to screw us yet again. I like to see some meaningful discussion on the topic for once instead of the usual poo flinging for their side as well as ours.

    Maybe it's time to give some to get some. I'd like to see a national carry. Yes I know that plenty out there will say it's a privacy violation. Guess what....it's coming anyway. The light at maybe a train. Maybe we can at least switch the rails before being hit.

    I'm not saying we cave, but with the last ban, we know it did nothing. There has to be a better way to figure this out.
    Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.
    Winston Churchill
  • gunrunner428gunrunner428 Senior Member Posts: 1,018 Senior Member
    This whole debate in Washington is a difference of ideologies. On one side, there are those who wish to demonize the tool used and overlook the responsibility of the individual, on the other, the belief that no matter what tool is in the hand it is the mind behind it that is ultimately responsible.

    Both sides believe they have the correct philosophy. The danger is when we allow the other side to enforce "reasonable" restrictions on the things they clamor for (the AWB of 1994 had NO effect on the levels of deadly crime, and no amount of number-shuffling will prove it!) and once we let the camel's nose under the edge of the tent, soon we'll have the whole dang beast in our laps.

    Assault weapons today, then "sniper rifles", envisioned by a politico holding up a Dragunov SVD and an Accuracy International as examples of the "evil weapons nobody needs" while writing legislation to ban any turnbolt rifle with accuracy potential better than two MOA "because who really needs to hit something smaller than the side of a deer? And at greater than 200 yards?" Then "sawed-off shotguns" or "street sweepers" which result in banning any barrels less than 24 inches or a magazine capacity of more than four (in one fell swoop outlawing Mossberg 500's as well as anything with an extended magazine in pump or semi-auto form). Then "gunfighter weapons", including single-action revolvers, lever-action rifles, and double-barrel shotguns.

    Scoff if you will, but remember the AWB that pronounced thirty round 10-22 aftermarket magazines as "evil" while Colt left off the arbitrary items that identified an "assault weapon" and returned the AR-15 - excuse me, the Colt Sporter Rifle - to dealers' shelves much to the uproar and consternation of Sarah Brady and company.

    Caving and compromising to the banning crowd will only give them license to proceed in kind. And note - the laws prevented, by one recent report, Adam Lazka from purchasing a firearm on his own, so he found a different route to acquire his weapons. Cowards such as school shooters look for the easy target, and what more of a sheepfold to a wolf is there than a "gun-free school zone?" Had the principal and other staffers who rushed the shooter upon his arrival at the school office been able to respond appropriately, this whole story would have been much different. As it is, there was no sheepdog capable of stopping the literal wolf at the door, and here we are.
  • NomadacNomadac Senior Member Posts: 902 Senior Member
    samzhere wrote: »
    1- what's called "assault weapons" are actually "repeating semiauto rifles". So let's talk about the actual weapon. I don't have an AR and simply haven't wanted one enough to buy one. Aside from a repeating rifle that fires, say, 3-5 rounds (small magazine or internal capacity), what does a private citizen have use of one (aside from the fun of shooting a 30-round mag)?

    During the Rodney King riots in LA the Koreans used AR-15's to protect their businesses from looters. During the Hurricane Katrina in LA. the homeowners used AR-15'sto protect their businesses and homes from looters. Many ranchers and owners along the TX. and AZ borders use AR-15's for protection of their properties from illegal aliens and drug smugglers crossing the border. Many prairie dog, varmit hunter use AR-15's and other individuals wanting a self defense rifle with larger capacity, in the event of home invasion, etc.

    If you're hunting, at which time would you need more shots? As I said, I've never been much of a hunter so I freely admit to not knowing -- are there hunting instances where you'd need more than a few shots immediately --- before reloading?

    Varmint hunting to name one and just plinking when you don't to keep reloading magazines.

    The other use would, of course, be self defense. And civilian, not LEO, please, does anyone know of an instance where a pure-dee private citizen had need to use a large capacity magazine for self defense (here, in the USA)?

    See list above.

    Not that the armed citizen grabbed his AR and used it to shoot an invader, that I realize can occur. My question is, when did the added rounds get used? Because all the self defense shootings I've read about involved only a few shots. So I'm asking, what instances have you read about where a larger cap magazine was needed?

    What is the difference between 3-10rd. mags and 1-30 rd. mag? Banning one over the other makes no difference if one wants to have more capacity, and you can change mags. in split seconds, so if you need to protect your self against a larger number of looters, home invasion, etc. more is better if an emergency exists.

    These questions go to the point of what might be coming: an "assault weapon" ban. And I'm asking, aside from the "not be infringed" argument, and the sheer fun of shooting high cap mags, what actual "value" does the private citizen get from owning an AR?

    Because then can. What is the difference between a Ruger Mini-14 Ranch Rifle and an AR-15 other than appearance? They both are semi auto, shoot 5.56 Nato, use or have available 20 or 30 rd. mags.

    Now I'm NOT saying "ban them" but perhaps there might be restrictions placed on ownership, where the prospective owner needs to take a quick class in their use? After all, we've become used to concealed carry licenses and classes, so maybe an AR class? I dunno -- I'm just asking.

    Then why not require an owner of a Glock or other high capacity 9mm or .40 cal. with high capacity mag. take a class? or high cap. shotguns that hold 7-8 or some with 14 rd. capacity?


    With that in mind, are there reasonable added restrictions that might be amenable to a pro-gun citizenry?

    IMO No

    Consider for example banning general ownership of hi-cap semiauto rifles. Aside from the fun of shooting hi-cap at the range, are there genuine hunting or self defense issues that might require hi-cap rifles (or pistols for that matter)?

    See above comments

    Understand, I'm trying to approach this issue with an open mind, without any preferences on my part because I'm a lifetime gun owner and longtime 2A/NRA supporter.

    I'm a gun owner for the past 61 years and member of hte NRA/2nd A. also and have read gun magazines for decades and have been a FFL holder, etc.

    And yes, again, I KNOW "don't give an inch" and generally believe that. But I also need to face reality here, and that there is going to be an immense outcry about some actions to take regarding this terrible shooting. I'm just tossing around ideas and see what you think.

    The only way to stop evil people with a Gun is With a Gun.

    http://minutemennews.com/2012/12/the-only-way-to-stop-a-gun-is-with-a-gun/
  • knitepoetknitepoet Senior Member Posts: 21,562 Senior Member
    Nomadac wrote: »
    The only way to stop evil people with a Gun is With a Gun.
    Hope you don't mind, but this is my new signature :beer:
    Seven Habits of Highly Effective Pirates, Rule #37: There is no “overkill”. There is only “open fire” and “I need to reload”.


  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    Nomadac wrote: »
    The only way to stop evil people with a Gun is With a Gun.

    http://minutemennews.com/2012/12/the-only-way-to-stop-a-gun-is-with-a-gun/

    Nomad, thanks for the extensive reply to my questions. You understand, I personally don't give a damn if someone wants to mount quad .50s to the roof of his car. I was tossing out some questions that are certain to come up in discussions. Thanks especially for the AR use by citizens info.
  • jbp-ohiojbp-ohio Senior Member Posts: 10,253 Senior Member
    Ask a Korean store owner in South Central LA how they feel about the need for hi-cap magazines......

    58852252.jpg
    "The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." Thomas Jefferson
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    Bigslug wrote: »
    Damn right I do.

    It comes down to this: I personally would rather run the slim daily risk of being shot accidentally by an incompetent, shot maliciously by a lunatic, or run over by a drunk driver, or by an untrained driver driving a high-performance vehicle beyond their skill level than to have my rights to shoot or drive abridged, curtailed, or eliminated merely because the possibility of that happening exists.

    The key in my world is to properly punish those who screw up.

    That's part of this problem, they can't punish the killer, he shot himself, they can't punish the mother who bought the guns because he killed her. So they (gun-grabbers) mostly are blaming the Ar-15 rifle and high capacity magazines.

    It's a sick dream come true for them to scream for new legislation for more gun control. They have been waiting for a golden opportunity like this for years, Columbine, AZ shooting or the Aurora CO. theater shooting didn't quite do it for them, but now 20 CHILDREN were murdered. Emotions are running high and the news media keeps pouring fuel on the fire with in your face 24/7 coverage.

    Don't kid yourselves, they won't stop until almost all guns are eventually banned. One step at a time.

    BTW: forget about any technically correct terminology between what is or isn't an "Assault Rifle" clip, magazine or "High Powered Bullets" it doesn't matter to them now. Thankfully, it is the holiday season and Obammy appointing numb nuts to head a commission/fact finding group will delay any vote/proposed bill until late Jan and maybe cooler heads will prevail to some extent, as time passes.
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    Big Chief wrote: »
    That's part of this problem, they can't punish the killer, he shot himself, they can't punish the mother who bought the guns because he killed her. So they (gun-grabbers) mostly are blaming the Ar-15 rifle and high capacity magazines.

    It's a sick dream come true for them to scream for new legislation for more gun control. They have been waiting for a golden opportunity like this for years, Columbine, AZ shooting or the Aurora CO. theater shooting didn't quite do it for them, but now 20 CHILDREN were murdered. Emotions are running high and the news media keeps pouring fuel on the fire with in your face 24/7 coverage.

    Don't kid yourselves, they won't stop until almost all guns are eventually banned. One step at a time.

    BTW: forget about any technically correct terminology between what is or isn't an "Assault Rifle" clip, magazine or "High Powered Bullets" it doesn't matter to them now. Thankfully, it is the holiday season and Obammy appointing numb nuts to head a commission/fact finding group will delay any vote/proposed bill until late Jan and maybe cooler heads will prevail to some extent, as time passes.

    Big, your conclusion is hopefully what will occur. Inertia in the lawmaking process will help. And since the election's over and the Republican house will be looking for any reason to oppose Obama, the ideas about passing new anti-gun laws may fizzle.

    There's also the fact that quite a few news stories are focusing on the mental health aspect of the shooting -- which is of course the correct direction to take in "fixing" the problem. Assuming it can be fixed at all, which I doubt. These shootings have an inertia and momentum of their own, each triggered by the previous when an unstable mind seizes the imagined cue.
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.

Advertisement