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.
So just.... repeal the 2nd, shut down and ban the entire industry, outlaw hundreds of millions of currently legally owned private property, ban the vast majority of those in existence, and confiscate the private property of hundreds of millions of citizens, all the while funding what would be one of the most unpopular government mandates since the civil war, while creating a police state to violate us citizens. ?
The resulting bloodbath would make people miss the current level of carnage.
You sir, are what we call a FUDD. An AR-15 with STANDARD capacity magazine holds thirty rounds. When multiple armed assailants kick down my front door in order to do harm to me, and my family, I am glad I have one. It may not even the odds, but it is better than a six round revolver. The AR-15 is also an excellent target, and HUNTING rifle. Many use them for hunting all kinds of game from varmints to deer. The AR-15 is modular, and uppers in various calibers, that are great for hunting can be had.
Rapid fire weapons? Do you mean semi auto firearms that have been around for over 100 years?
If one is that afraid, one might want to inquire or review what one is doing that could attract such volume of assault motivated people to target ones residence (?????)
Either ways it goes... the public will have the final say, and if there are politicians that get in the way of what the people decide, they will certainly remove such politicians.
I already know anything typed in this site will be attacked, from a thousands angles if not more. I don't trip on that.
As to the Weapon, I have friends who own that particular unit, and I know others who have plans to buy one of the same units. It still does not make me think I need one. I can't stop them form wanting it, nor can I stop any of you, so what's your panic.
Now... if people go nuts in general society, having one might not help one for very long anyway. Technically speaking as it relates to the human body, It only takes one bullet to shut down the most aggressive defender or combatant.
You guys can relax... it will take America a very long time, to put gun control in place that would have the ability to gather up all the guns it deems to be illegal types to possess.
Last edited by Chance and Change; 11-07-2017 at 03:43 PM..
If you are that afraid, one might want to inquire or review what one is doing that could attract such volume of assault motivated people to target ones residence.
Im curious about your posting style and thought process. Are you very young?
Yes, gun are a problem, and our weak control is a problem "We need Improved Gun Control"... I'm a gun owner, and want to keep my gun!!! but I also know that I have no need within the American System of Society nor "within" the American Landscape of this Nation to need an "Assault Styled Weapon". There just is no logical need for it. !!!
It is not good for hunting nor is it respectful to the Animals being hunted. We don't need to set up Military Defense at our homes, as we have a National Military, a Federal Law Force, A State Law Force, A Country Law Force, and a City Law Force.
Shot Guns can hold 6 shells,
the standard magazine of a semi auto pistol is 6 and can be 9 rounds.
A long gun with a magazine of 6 rounds
There is nothing we need a rapid fire weapons, beyond the scope of these hunting and home protection levels, we simply don't have a base need for it, and certainly we as citizens do not something that can spew out 10's and 100's of rounds a minute.
We simply need to make sure our Political system functions and we have enough controls in place that no man, or men can orchestrate a military styled take over of the nation under some autocratic or dictatorial agenda and premise. Therefore, we need to make sure... that No individual President or any high ranking official to institute any level of any kind of Martial Law without Congressional Approval... with votes from Both Parties... and considering the gamesmanship played to force feed a man on our Supreme Court... then we up the vote count necessary to 90 or even 100, or 120... what ever is the number to assure the people of Peace and no usurping our Governance System takes place. and that mandates that members of "both parties must support any choice to engage in any factions of Martial Law, and the Constitution cannot be arbitrarily suspended. "....
These the people can cease with the rhetoric about.. their guns as being a guard against insurrection of our government against its people.
Not good for hunting? I take pigs with both AK and AR platform rifles...
Not good for hunting
30-30 is DEVASTATING to a hog. 5.56 in 1 ear out the other.
7.62x39 out to 100 yards clean through the shoulder and into the heart. Where as the 30-30 would destroy the shoulder, fragment and might hit the heart.
What about 3 gun competitions that I and many others compete in?
You want to shut down an industry that employs 1000s to suit your feeble desire?
I have a better idea.
How about we purge California of republicans, Let California break off become it's own country and let all those who hate freedom and want government paid health insurance and college move there? Send all liberals to California and let it be it's own country.
Again, that largely effects only the law abiding. Criminals STEAL guns, or buy them illegally on the street. They also steal ammunition. So when you say ban all handguns, semi-autos and mag fed firearms you mean mandatory confiscation form those that legally possess them? That will only disarm the law abiding, as criminals will not turn in their guns.
So you would push to repeal the 2A, as that would be the only way to get this passed into law.
Limiting the number of guns allowed wouldn't violate the second amendment since you could still legally be armed with rifles and shotguns. Does the fact you can't buy Stinger Missiles violate your second amendment rights?
Criminals only have access to guns the rest of the civilian market can obtain. When was the last time somebody committed a crime with a banned weapon? Its generally extremely rare. If you don't have access to guns, they don't have access to guns. As you already mentioned, they obtain guns through thefts, straw purchases and second hand sales from legal gun owners. What you can't possess they can't possess.
This has been the case with every single country that has put gun ownership restrictions in place. When Australia put a gun ban in place criminals quit using guns because there were none.
You're God damn right that's scary. Especially when governments from the local to the federal level are giant cesspools of corruption. Governments are a monopoly accountable to no one. Politicians lie, cheat, steal and prostitute themselves for some crummy little political office. How anyone can place their faith and trust in any elected official is beyond me? But it's all about power and control. As Lord Acton wrote: Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely".
Hey we're from NY...
We've been to NY DMVs...
NY showed those who've paid attention how corrupt government is. How government can not operate within a budget. How government doesn't produce a product, a good, or service, but comes up with interesting ways to generate revenue via taxation and fines.
Nobody will listen to us though. They're brainwashed into thinking the government is so awesome.
Yet...
Trump=Hitler.
Turn in your guns there are police officers.
Yet.
Police officers are trigger happy racist and just thugs with badges...
It’s absolutely not about gun control, my sister has been in S. Korea for 8 years, right next to a wacko with nukes and feels safer there than in her own country of the US.,
Limiting the number of guns allowed wouldn't violate the second amendment since you could still legally be armed with rifles and shotguns. Does the fact you can't buy Stinger Missiles violate your second amendment rights?
Criminals only have access to guns the rest of the civilian market can obtain. When was the last time somebody committed a crime with a banned weapon? Its generally extremely rare. If you don't have access to guns, they don't have access to guns. As you already mentioned, they obtain guns through thefts, straw purchases and second hand sales from legal gun owners. What you can't possess they can't possess.
This has been the case with every single country that has put gun ownership restrictions in place. When Australia put a gun ban in place criminals quit using guns because there were none.
The fact the NFA and Hughes Amendment exist violates 2nd Amendment rights.
I don't know how many times I have to say this... basic tools make a basic forge and with household chemicals and metals one could build everything that's available and more.
What you propose only tests ingenuity.
Good luck on banning knowledge and banning scrap metals.
He's no gun owner. He's just trying to give himself some credibility on the subject of guns. He's one of those "I'm not looking to take away anyone's guns as long as they don't take away mine". As if he has any at all. So you see he has nothing to lose.
You are quite funny....
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.
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.
