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.
Okay so where's the list of "gun nut owners here" that commited mass killings? So far it was people that used a gun to kill instead of other means to kill en masse, not responsible gun collectors, hunters, enthusiasts, etc that you love to call gun nuts.
For 55 years gun grabbers have demanded new law, more laws, and we gave tolerance, but each time for 55 years they demanded more. Any times we gave an inch they took a mile.
No more tolerance....... 0, none, NADA....... and my reply was reasonable. I don't give a flyin' rats ass what your asian wife thinks.
You, sir are an ass. I was trying to explain why I don't have guns, not that my wife wants to restrict your rights. What a noob.
It's no wonder why no one can have a reasonable discussion with people like you. You're not reasonable and possibly irrational. God help us all if you are armed.
We don't agree on he army being illegal, but I appreciate the response. At least you and a couple of others are civil as opposed to the few that just chest thump about not having to justify anything to anybody,
I always wanted to try flintlocks but never got the chance. I agree those are too slow f or any kind of defense. That more of just fun shooting.
And yeah, I mixed up two guns I had. There is no such thing as an over and under pump action.
Well you are in need of more reading because it is illegal for this country to have any standing army. This was never intended to be, as it is too high a risk. Each state was to have a Militia. Today we have this as National Guard. We are not supposed to be world cops either.
Obama is quite helpless to use the Military against his own people on USA soil, but the governors are able to call out the guard. This is why there is FEMA, NSA, TSA and related BS the feds are pulling.
The problem is Obama and the Democratic party, is dumb enough to try.
I really don't like you mixed up double barrel over unders with pump guns. It says a lot. Like you didn't shoot much, and never hunted at all.
I use flintlocks to hunt deer and birds...... I own assorted other modern guns from 1880 on........
I don't need to justify any of them to any one very official. These are my birth right.
I will own as close to what ever is a military grade weapon as I can afford. Over all I think every one age 21 to 50, male and female should be required by LAW to own a current mil grade weapon, ammo and maintain it.
Anyone not doing so, should pay fee's, fines, and taxes to exceed 10 times the cost. Also they should be forced by law to post a sign with letter no less than 6 inches tall in both spanish and english that their house is unarmed.
Me, I have had it with bleeding liberal hearts grabbers.... 0 Tolerance to them.
You, sir are an ass. I was trying to explain why I don't have guns, not that my wife wants to restrict your rights. What a noob.
It's no wonder why no one can have a reasonable discussion with people like you. You're not reasonable and possibly irrational. God help us all if you are armed.
Well you are in need of more reading because it is illegal for this country to have any standing army. This was never intended to be, as it is too high a risk. Each state was to have a Militia. Today we have this as National Guard. We are not supposed to be world cops either.
Obama is quite helpless to use the Military against his own people on USA soil, but the governors are able to call out the guard. This is why there is FEMA, NSA, TSA and related BS the feds are pulling.
The problem is Obama and the Democratic party, is dumb enough to try.
I really don't like you mixed up double barrel over unders with pump guns. It says a lot. Like you didn't shoot much, and never hunted at all.
I use flintlocks to hunt deer and birds...... I own assorted other modern guns from 1880 on........
I don't need to justify any of them to any one very official. These are my birth right.
I will own as close to what ever is a military grade weapon as I can afford. Over all I think every one age 21 to 50, male and female should be required by LAW to own a current mil grade weapon, ammo and maintain it.
Anyone not doing so, should pay fee's, fines, and taxes to exceed 10 times the cost. Also they should be forced by law to post a sign with letter no less than 6 inches tall in both spanish and english that their house is unarmed.
Me, I have had it with bleeding liberal hearts grabbers.... 0 Tolerance to them.
You really have no idea what you're talking about. I've never heard such rubbish. I suppose you're a birther too.
The Supreme Court that has been bought and paid for by the NRA.
BWWaaaaaaHHahahahaha
You clearly have no clue what you're talking about. If you did you'd know the big evil NRA actually OPPOSED the Heller vs. D.C. case even being heard by the Supreme court.....
From Wikipedia:
Quote:
Attorney Alan Gura, in a 2003 filing, used the term "sham litigation" to
describe the NRA's attempts to have Parker (aka Heller) consolidated with
its own case challenging the D.C. law. Gura also stated that "the NRA was
adamant about not wanting the Supreme Court to hear the case". These concerns
were based on NRA lawyers' assessment that the justices at the time the case was
filed might reach an unfavorable decision. senior fellow Robert Levy, co-counsel to the Parker
plaintiffs, has stated that the Parker plaintiffs "faced repeated
attempts by the NRA to derail the litigation."He also stated
that "The N.R.A.’s interference in this process set us back and almost killed
the case. It was a very acrimonious relationship."
All I see here are people basically getting really upset with each other. I was going to respond harshly, but lets see if I can do this calmly and ask you a serious question.
Let me set this up by saying I was a gun owner that had a Ruger 357 magnum (i loved that gun, stainless steel...) a 30/30 Winchester lever action rifle, a 12 gauge pump action over and under shotgun, a .22 caliber rifle and a 30-06 rifle with scope. I got rid of them when the Air Force transferred me to Japan and I was told I was not allowed to take them.
The ONLY reason I don't have a handgun now is my wife is not comfortable with them. She is from Singapore and they don't allow guns there at all. I'm a former gun owner. I get it. I don't think we should ban all guns, that's stupid.
Please explain to me why someone needs a magazine that holds 40-50 rounds or something like a semi-automatic AK-47. I had someone here say that they lived in a rural area that had some not so nice critters and that I understand. But why do you need such a weapon? Why isn't a handgun that holds 9 rounds enough?
I'm looking for a rational discussion instead of telling each other to get stuffed or go back to their bunker. I understand I contributed to that, but lets have a civil discussion because I'm really mystified by the fervor here.
I invite anyone respond.
I'd like to have a rational discussion to!
You may see it as sarcastic but those that are saying they don't need to have a need or to justify it are right. They have a Right to own these arms, and that's as far as the explanation needs to go. Secondly, if we start banning this specific weapon or that one, soon, we will have nothing left. All you need to do is look to England for a clear cut example of this. They had a mass shooting with a certain type of gun, so they banned it. The next psycho used handguns, so they banned them, and on down the line it went. Thirdly, how do you decide that a ten round magazine is "safe" enough? Are we saying that the damage someone could cause with a ten round magazine is acceptable? Of course not. someone will use a bunch of ten round magazines and then they will be banned and on it will go until the Second amendment won't even be recognizable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike930
So because you think you have a right to have it, that's
enough
The thing is, we don't "think" we have a right to have it, we do have a right to have it, as stated by the Second Amendment and Confirmed by the Supreme Court. Since it has been determined that we have this Right, that truly is pretty much the only reason we need.
Quote:
. Is there a stopping point or is everything within your rights? High
capacity magazines, RPGs, does it stop anywhere?
Sure. The Supreme Court has defined that stopping point as a weapon that isn't commonly owned, is unusual, and/or isn't useful for lawful purposes. That sounds like a reasonable stopping point to me.
Quote:
And I never asked you to justify it to me
Except you did, when you asked us to provide a reason why we need such a weapon.
Quote:
. A handgun would have been sufficient.
I'm honestly not trying to be defensive or sarcastic, but who are you to decide what is sufficient for me and mine and what would best suit my needs?
You may see it as sarcastic but those that are saying they don't need to have a need or to justify it are right. They have a Right to own these arms, and that's as far as the explanation needs to go. Secondly, if we start banning this specific weapon or that one, soon, we will have nothing left. All you need to do is look to England for a clear cut example of this. They had a mass shooting with a certain type of gun, so they banned it. The next psycho used handguns, so they banned them, and on down the line it went. Thirdly, how do you decide that a ten round magazine is "safe" enough? Are we saying that the damage someone could cause with a ten round magazine is acceptable? Of course not. someone will use a bunch of ten round magazines and then they will be banned and on it will go until the Second amendment won't even be recognizable.
The thing is, we don't "think" we have a right to have it, we do have a right to have it, as stated by the Second Amendment and Confirmed by the Supreme Court. Since it has been determined that we have this Right, that truly is pretty much the only reason we need.
Sure. The Supreme Court has defined that stopping point as a weapon that isn't commonly owned, is unusual, and/or isn't useful for lawful purposes. That sounds like a reasonable stopping point to me.
Except you did, when you asked us to provide a reason why we need such a weapon.
I'm honestly not trying to be defensive or sarcastic, but who are you to decide what is sufficient for me and mine and what would best suit my needs?
Thanks for responding.
Maybe I didn't make myself clear. I wasn't asking everyone to tell me in the sense of having to justify yourselves to me, I was asking as someone trying to keep an open mind thinking that maybe I'm missing something. I'm a former gun owner and I'm open to the possibility that I'm wrong in thinking that's there's no need for high capacity magazines. I'm trying to learn, not challenging everyone.
Granted that I came on with the idea that's the weapons aren't needed, but I always want to hear all sides. My problem here is that everyone seems by defensive, one guy got all bent out of shape because I mixed up shot guns and said I had something that doesn't exist. Sorry, but it's been 25 years since I had a gun.
I don't think it's right to ban all guns. Instead of trying to explain it to me, I get attacks. Again, I don't mean you HAVE to explain it to me. I'm asking to get your side, but most don't seem to want to have a rational discussion.
Someone sent me a pretty good article about the stopping power of a bullet that has me delving into it more.
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.
I don't give a flyin' rats ass what your asian wife thinks.
