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.
Is this all about you? 20 children were riddled with multiple bullets within minutes and you worry that you might have to reload more often at the range!
What you don't seem to understand is that if I don't care about recovering my magazines, which I do at the range, but would not in the event I'm attempting to kill as many innocent unarmed people as I can in the shortest amount of time possible, is that it makes very little difference.
I can load 100 10 round magazines at my leisure, prior to embarking on my evil plans. It doesn't make any real difference if I have 4 30 round magazines.
The amount of lead I can put downrange in either scenario is pretty much identical, save a few tenths of a second.
I'm a law abiding citizen, and if I had the money I buy a m134 minigun for myself. For those that don't know what it is, it's the gun Arnold used in T2 to destroy all the cop cars. Heck, I'd probably get two of them. For the record, I'm against guns.
What you don't seem to understand is that if I don't care about recovering my magazines, which I do at the range, but would not in the event I'm attempting to kill as many innocent unarmed people as I can in the shortest amount of time possible, is that it makes very little difference.
I can load 100 10 round magazines at my leisure, prior to embarking on my evil plans. It doesn't make any real difference if I have 4 30 round magazines.
The amount of lead I can put downrange in either scenario is pretty much identical, save a few tenths of a second.
My mistake but your defense that the gun jammed at Aurora is a defense of high capacity magazines? You never answered the question, what would have happened if the gun didn't jam, how many more would have been killed.
Yes they are legal, that is not the issue and you still have not answered the question, what practical use does someone have for a 30 round semi-automatic weapon.
Even the playing field, for who, the proliferation of these guns to people that supposedly had good intentions are ending up in the hands of murderers.
While the gun hawks are at it, why stop at semi automatics When full auto will do so much more damage in less time also.
The problem is it's a race to nowhere except self extermination. No matter what you got some other guy will have a bigger one, or more of them. Guns DO kill, cause, like cars, it takes a real person to pull the trigger over and over.
Take some advice from Canada, they have strict gun laws ! It's working. They are more like people in the US.than other Countries , seem we could learn a lot from them.
I tried very hard, but I can't think of any reason why a law abiding citizen would want to own an assault weapon. If your true motive for owning a gun is to protect yourself, why isn't a normal gun good enough? What's next, your own miniature nuclear bomb under the guise of "Second Amendment rights"? Where does it stop?
That's because liberals have a particularly tough time with thinking. You all don't listen very well either, because there are many here that have already explained these things in very clear, simple terms.
And this really is as easy as falling off a log ... many Americans have not allowed this brainwashing to affect their better judgement about the value of the constitution, including the rights guaranteed by it. Many of these people are former military who have served their country and earned those rights through service to all of us, and they believe people like you don't have the right to tell them what their rights should and should not be, including what type of firearm they don't need.
Now this will probably fall on deaf ears ... and frankly, it's really hard to anticipate much else from people who cannot discern the difference between a rifle and a nuclear weapon.
I notice from C-D how those of use who responsibly own hand guns and long guns are "gun lovers" who feel "a sense of power" by owning a gun.
Truthfully, the only occasions I feel/felt I truly have power over someone is when making love to a women. Is that going to be banned as well?
Depends on the size of your weapon and is it considered an 'assault weapon'? How long it takes you to reload may also be considered. Those with derringers need not worry.
The burning question I have for those who seek to ban firearms....are you willing to collect them? I mean you, personally. Would you sign up to go door to door, or work some place where gun owners are forced to turn in their weapons?
I feel like I know what the answer would be, especially if you'd have to go door to door...
Until the early 1960s, American commercial passenger pilots were required to carry handguns. An Federal Aviation Administration rule that allowed commercial airline pilots to be armed was inexplicably rescinded two months before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
My mistake but your defense that the gun jammed at Aurora is a defense of high capacity magazines? You never answered the question, what would have happened if the gun didn't jam, how many more would have been killed.
Even better question: How many fewer people would have been killed had the theatre not been a gun free zone? Considering that Aurora is smack dab in the middle of an area that is frequented by military personell, several of which were there that evening, don't you think that an armed response may have stopped the shooter?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight
Yes they are legal, that is not the issue and you still have not answered the question, what practical use does someone have for a 30 round semi-automatic weapon.
What practical reason is there for getting rid of 30 round magazines? We've had exactly ONE high profile shooting that involved 30 round magazines, as I showed in my previous post. Banning 30 round magazines is a knee-jerk, feel good reaction to a problem that goes a whole lot deeper than the number of rounds available, but apparently you feel that it will actually do some good. It didn't work in the past, and it won't work now.
As for practicality, quite honestly Americans do a lot of things that aren't practical. Practicality has nothing to do with the fact that there is absolutely no reason to prohibit an item that thousands of law abiding citizens use on a regular basis due to the actions of one deranged individual.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight
Even the playing field, for who, the proliferation of these guns to people that supposedly had good intentions are ending up in the hands of murderers.
Adam Lanza stole his mother's guns after he killed her, then used them to commit heinous acts. Your knee-jerk reaction to this situation is almost comical, if it weren't for the fact that you seem to seriously believe what you are posting. There are hundreds of millions of firearms in the United States, and due to a miniscule percentage of those firearms being used in assaults you feel that legislation is not only needed, but would be effective in curbing violence.
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.
