U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 03-24-2013, 12:32 PM
 
20,836 posts, read 39,041,284 times
Reputation: 19042

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanek9freak View Post
....civilians should be allowed to own an Abrahms tank if they can afford one.
But, with two sprockets and seven wheels on each side, no one could afford the cool rims to make that puppy really standout at the drive-in on Saturday night.
__________________
- Please follow our TOS.
- Any Questions about City-Data? See the FAQ list.
- Want some detailed instructions on using the site? See The Guide for plain english explanation.
- Realtors are welcome here but do see our Realtor Advice to avoid infractions.
- Thank you and enjoy City-Data.

 
Old 03-24-2013, 01:34 PM
 
4,743 posts, read 3,717,473 times
Reputation: 2481
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzlover View Post
Spoken by someone from Chicago--if one accepts his moniker; the Chicago having some of the most restrictive gun laws in the US, and also one of the highest crime and murder rates in the US. In fact, most of the cities in the US with the most restrictive gun laws also sport some of the highest crime rates and murder rates.

If people are really concerned about curtailing gun violence, the best way to do that is enact severe penalties, up to and including the death penalty, for persons convicted of using a firearm to commit a felony. Of course, that is not what the unseemly side of the gun control movement is about. As is succinctly put in a bumper sticker, "Gun control is not about guns, it's about control."

Cities ability to put forward gun legislation that has ANY impact (due to the limited geographic boundaries of a city) is a pointless waste of time. Chicago gun laws are stupid - seriously. . .and I only lived there a VERY short period of time. You can just drive 30 minutes and your out side of them.


Death Penalty does nothing, so strike 1.

The issue isn't the act of using a weapon in a criminal act. . .that isn't the problem. If the social economic drivers are there, the weapon will be used. .regardless of consequences (try telling a teenager/low 20s of lifelong consequences)

The need/goal should be to increase the cost of weapons to those who use them illegally. the peanalities need to be on gun registration, if you lose your gun (i.e. gun insurance required), and transfer of firearms.

The problem isn't gun ownership, its the ease to say your gun is "stolen" then sell it to some punk down the road for some extra drug money or hamburger money or whatever


The sensible legislation registers/tracks/increases the cost of illegitimate sales to make the ownership of a gun cost prohibitive to criminals and people who would sell their guns for a "profit"

Personally, I think requiring insurance for any purchase of a firearm should be a first step. And if you have a habit of "losing" your guns. . .your insurance will be so high/or you can't get it. . that it stops the purchase.
 
Old 03-24-2013, 01:37 PM
 
4,743 posts, read 3,717,473 times
Reputation: 2481
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanek9freak View Post
I can tell when you say "clip" that you have no idea how firearms function or operate. And for the record, civilians should be allowed to own an Abrahms tank if they can afford one.
ha ha ha ha, good one


And if Donald Trump wants to raise his own independent army.. .with Nukes and Abrahms, he should "be able to"


and by what God or document did this right of weaponry come?

maybe your own head. . .but it goes no further
 
Old 03-24-2013, 01:48 PM
 
Location: Colorado
2,561 posts, read 5,007,533 times
Reputation: 2223
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanek9freak View Post
I can tell when you say "clip" that you have no idea how firearms function or operate. And for the record, civilians should be allowed to own an Abrahms tank if they can afford one.

Yes indeed..Always buy American instead of those inferior Russion T-90's . I would be flat out embarrassed to roll up in one of those jalopies. Your post is king of this thread in my book(funny). By the way I think I said clip myself in an earlier post when speaking of mags.

Last edited by Scott5280; 03-24-2013 at 02:02 PM..
 
Old 03-24-2013, 02:08 PM
 
5,500 posts, read 6,940,087 times
Reputation: 2767
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike from back east View Post
No one is infringing on anyone's rights to own any of thousands of makes and models of firearms; long or short barrel, rifled or smooth bore, muzzle or breech loader, or how many of them. If I want a hundred generic hunting rifles, it'll still be perfectly legal for me to do so.

The issue here really is one of "where do we draw the line" on what is a reasonable weapon to own. IMO owning M1 tanks is not reasonable, nor howitzers, nor MRAPs, nor Bradleys, etc. Where we draw the line is not an easy issue to define and then fix our limits. Nor do I want a civilian version of an M1 tank or self-propelled howitzer. The only successful civilian version of Army hardware that quickly comes to mind is the HUMMER version of the HUMMV, but I see a lot fewer of them these days; fuel costs probably got them, but IMO they're much closer to being "industrial vehicles" than a family cruiser for a Sunday drive in the park.

But the zany ones out there have taken the "where do we draw the line" aspect and turned it inside out into a nutjob rant of "the guv'mint is gonna take all yer gunz." I visualize the "Floyd R Turbo" character of Johnny Carson days.

No matter the topic, those who can't maintain a civil, intelligent, logical stream of thought don't belong here.

There are many private owners of tanks, just as there are many owners of cannons.
 
Old 03-24-2013, 02:10 PM
 
5,500 posts, read 6,940,087 times
Reputation: 2767
Quote:
Originally Posted by artisan4 View Post
We have laws against murder and speeding, and while some may ignore them, I prefer to live in a society which has those laws, which are generally obeyed and enforced.

Speeding has nothing to do with safety. Next time you enjoy that 75mph legal drive down a Colorado freeway, remember that very same road used to have a 55mph speed limit (that was ignored).
 
Old 03-24-2013, 02:13 PM
 
5,500 posts, read 6,940,087 times
Reputation: 2767
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shuffler View Post
I'm fine with anybody who legally owns and uses firearms ... .50cal is pretty popular among those into long-range precision shooting, or collectors of 'exotics'. Not much different than somebody who has a garage full of cars, motorcycles, etc.

.338 Lapua and .416 Cheytec are better than .50 cal for long range shooting.
 
Old 03-24-2013, 04:07 PM
 
8,317 posts, read 25,774,765 times
Reputation: 9132
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisFromChicago View Post
and by what God or document did this right of weaponry come?
The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, to wit, my emphasis in italics:

Quote:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Now, there are certain circumstances where citizens of this country do have to surrender their rights--being convicted of a felonious crime is one of them. Therefore, I stand by my statement that the way to take guns from the hands of criminals is to remove criminals who use guns to commit crimes from society, either by lengthy or lifetime incarceration, or by the death penalty.

I also am a strong supporter of the death penalty for sane individuals convicted of serious crimes of violence. Why? Because for most sane people, the threat of the death penalty IS a strong deterrent; and, even if it were not, there can be no argument that there is no chance of recidivism from a criminal executed for his/her heinous act.
 
Old 03-24-2013, 07:39 PM
 
9,830 posts, read 19,523,464 times
Reputation: 7597
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanek9freak View Post
I can tell when you say "clip" that you have no idea how firearms function or operate. And for the record, civilians should be allowed to own an Abrahms tank if they can afford one.
I agree as well and there are civilians that own old tanks as well as jet fighter planes.
 
Old 03-24-2013, 07:41 PM
 
5,500 posts, read 6,940,087 times
Reputation: 2767
Quote:
Originally Posted by wanneroo View Post
I agree as well and there are civilians that own old tanks as well as jet fighter planes.

Go to just about any airshow and you will see civilians flying their own former military jet.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:26 AM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top