[pickledpainter]

Futuretown: "I don't understand why people want to imitate war settings in America."

Might want to ask DHS with their purchase of over a 70 million (yes, you read that right) rounds of hollowpoint, which can not be used in "war" Geneva convention and all that.

So that's strictly for "domestic" use.

I think they're planning on helluva block party, wouldn't you say?

[snatale1]

Originally Posted by adamz

In your view, why do politicians want to disarm everyone? What do they get out of it?

That's the whole thing... they get NOTHING out of it! Disarming via the creation of laws only effects the law abiding, no criminal will ever turn in their guns, carry low capacity mags, conform with senseless laws etc. THAT'S why the gun debate gets so heated. Most of the politicians AND normal people voting for this nonsense typically haven't the slightest clue what their talking about when it comes to guns. The biggest reason people go for "Gun Control" (IMO) is because the media helps it along by repeating what they hear, keywords that scare people like "Assault Weapon" "Glock" "High Capacity" "High Powered" etc.

I honestly believe most people (even non gun owners) wouldn't be so affraid of people owning an AR-15 if they were only more educated on them. It's a medium powered rifle, nothing more, nothing less. But the fact that it LOOKS like an M16 started the whole "Military Style" fear tactic that's used now. Most of them also think "Semi Automatic" means machine gun / full auto which it obviously isn't. The news doesn't want to tell people that though, that looses attention and votes. People also don't realize that all licensed dealers have ALWAYS needed to run people through the system and think we currently don't have steps to stop people with mental health issues (assuming they were reported to the system) from buying, which the current NICS system has always been capable of.

Originally Posted by kidyankee764

See, I'm against the gun laws in CT and I'm pro 2A, and this argument does anyone who responsibly carries an injustice. You people are making us (the majority of responsible gun owners) out to be crazies. Knock off the tin foil government conspiracy crap.

I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but I'm also not so stupid that I don't see something very wrong with the governments attitude the last couple years to legal gun ownership. What have they done or attempted to do that would actually help reduce gun crime? Nothing. YET they've proposed plenty to make a de-facto national gun registry (which their Federally prohibited from doing). Tried to pass laws that would ban weapons, that even when grandfathered would be confiscated upon the death of the owner, no legal transfers, no willing it to you children, just taken from you. Tried to redefine transfers to the point of family members becoming felons if the owner wasn't around for a certain amount of time....UNLESS you turned it in to save yourself of course. It doesn't take a genius to see a long term confiscation in progress.

How about DHS (which doesn't serve a Police roll) buying up BILLIONS of dollars of ammo which they weren't authorized to buy, then having millions of targets printed with pregnant teenage girls, farmers, and kids on playgrounds all aiming guns at them, sorry that should scare the crap out of anybody! Even now that DHS was probed and scolded for it, their spending BILLIONS more to DESTROY all the ammo our tax money bought!

I'm not against being put through a NICS background check
I'm not against proving I can hit what I'm aiming at
I'm not against that I was fingerprinted and put through an FBI check to get my concealed permit
I'm not against gun safety or the 21yr old age requirement

What I AM agaisnt, is laws that only hurt the law abiding and do NOTHING aside from that.

[adamz]

Originally Posted by snatale1

That's the whole thing... they get NOTHING out of it! Disarming via the creation of laws only effects the law abiding, no criminal will ever turn in their guns, carry low capacity mags, conform with senseless laws etc.

snip

How about DHS (which doesn't serve a Police roll) buying up BILLIONS of dollars of ammo which they weren't authorized to buy, then having millions of targets printed with pregnant teenage girls, farmers, and kids on playgrounds all aiming guns at them, sorry that should scare the crap out of anybody!

No offense, but these two things don't mesh. What do you really think?

Look, I understand that criminals will not abide by gun laws. But if there are fewer guns in circulation, it will be harder for criminals to get guns.

And here's the thing: once you get past the paranoid anti-government stuff, no one needs an AR-15 for any legitimate purpose. You may want one, you may feel that it's your right to have one, but there is no NEED whatsoever for you to have one.

So, on the one hand we have what you want, and on the other hand we have taking steps that in the long term may reduce the number of guns in circulation, thus saving the lives of some kindergarteners.

Hmmmmm

[pickledpainter]

Futuretown: "Anyways, in the two years past Sandy Hook, there have been 75 school shootings."

BS, you're either uneducated or lying. Pick with one please.

Let's look at the facts, ok?


http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...andy-hook-clo/

BULLLsheeettttttttttttt

your source was funded by Bloomberg.

You realize Bloomberg spent millions funding "moderate" Republicans this recent election to try to buy influence from them in anti-second amendment legislation.

[pickledpainter]

adamz :"So, on the one hand we have what you want, and on the other hand we have taking steps that in the long term may reduce the number of guns in circulation, thus saving the lives of some kindergarteners."

"May"

Or may not.

Got any FACTS to back that up? Do you know how many home invasions are thwarted by armed homeowners?

Do a search.

"But if there are fewer guns in circulation, it will be harder for criminals to get guns."

Yea, prohibition....WOD, you crack me up.

[Sigequinox]

Originally Posted by adamz

The point of the law is to reduce the number of high-capacity magazines and firearms capable of using them circulating in the state.

It's really very simple: if Adam Lanza hadn't had access to an AR15 and high capacity magazines, he wouldn't have been able to butcher 20 kindergarteners.

Over time, the number of the banned weapons around will decrease.

I'm not belittling your personal sentiment in support of the law, it's nobel enough, but it is also, unfortunately, a false sense of security/hope.

This may have been the intention of politicians in the 1990s, but (and we all seem to forget) that the FEDERAL assault weapons ban that was in effect when Columbine and dozens of other school shootings happened. Post Federal AWB analysis shows no statistical decrease in gun related murder or crimes during that period either. It accomplished nothing. It was a fair enough experiment, but it proved ineffective. As they say,"insanity" is trying the same thing twice and expected different results.

Like I said in a previous post, if there were ANY indication this law would do ANYTHING, I would support it. I believe in public safety too. However, I'm very educated on this particular issue and all I see is political smoke. The only reason I care is because I'm literally giving up something for NOTHING.

[kidyankee764]

Originally Posted by snatale1

I'm not a conspiracy theorist

Originally Posted by snatale1

How about DHS (which doesn't serve a Police roll) buying up BILLIONS of dollars of ammo which they weren't authorized to buy, then having millions of targets printed with pregnant teenage girls, farmers, and kids on playgrounds all aiming guns at them, sorry that should scare the crap out of anybody! Even now that DHS was probed and scolded for it, their spending BILLIONS more to DESTROY all the ammo our tax money bought!

You're not?

Again, enough with this crap.

[panasyncp17]

Originally Posted by pickledpainter

adamz :"So, on the one hand we have what you want, and on the other hand we have taking steps that in the long term may reduce the number of guns in circulation, thus saving the lives of some kindergarteners."

"May"

Or may not.

Got any FACTS to back that up? Do you know how many home invasions are thwarted by armed homeowners?

Do a search.

"But if there are fewer guns in circulation, it will be harder for criminals to get guns."

Yea, prohibition....WOD, you crack me up.

Hey give him a break, since banning drugs it's been real hard for criminals to purchase, make, distribute, sell, and use drugs.

[pickledpainter]

KidYankee, it's not crap.

Why does the Postal service need shotguns and AR's?

Why does IRS need shotguns. Any simple internet search can turn up the purchase orders for many Fedgov agencies purchasing hollowpoint and sniper rounds. Millions and millions of them. Again, these can NOT be used by our armed forces, they're "illegal" as determined by the Geneva Convention.

1.6 Billion Rounds Of Ammo For Homeland Security? It's Time For A National Conversation - Forbes

Are you lazy or do you just choose to remain ignorant. Enjoy your cranial rectal inversion syndrome.

[kidyankee764]

Originally Posted by pickledpainter

KidYankee, it's not crap.

It's crap. And as I said, people who believe this $#!& make the rest of us responsible gun owners look like nut jobs.

Is your tin foil hat comfortable?