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.
The NRA, the President, The Second Amendment, and millions of law abiding gun owning citizens are under attack by the Left and their anti gun crusaders because one deranged idiot choose to murder 17 people.
I just saw a post on facebook where a uber Liberal "friend" posted a video from "Occupy Democrats" featuring the CEO of Dicks sporting goods and applauding their move to stop selling assault rifles.
He also posted another video of how great Australia is doing after they confiscated every gun from the hands of law abiding citizens.
Is this what Dems really want for America? Do they really want to remove the Second amendment from the Constitution and turn good citizens into felons if they do not comply to turn in their guns?
It seems ridiculous to think that this could happen in America but if not for Trump it would be happening right now. Don't these people understand that they are giving up a right to protect themselves? Don't they know that America was created by men with freedom in their hearts and a gun in their hand?
I really think that the attempts by the Left to demonize the NRA is crazy when all they try to do is hold onto tradition. There is not one NRA member or legal gun owner that condones the murder of innocent people.
If one deranged murderer has the ability to destroy something that is so important to millions of people why don't we first turn our attentions to the opiod crisis? How about when a airliner goes down killing hundreds of men, women and children? It is tragic, we grieve and yet we get on with our day and we willingly board the next flight on the same airliner. Why would we do that?
There are so many examples where terrible things have happened when a product is in the hands of the wrong sick person.
Why didn't Walmart stop selling pressure cookers when 2 were used by terrorists to kill and injure hundreds at the Boston Marathon a few years ago?
Something has to be done I agree but banning what is legal and held responsibly by millions of citizens doesn't make sense.
What was it that caused that loser in Florida to kill? We need to be more focused on that, his mental illness then the device he used to kill.
It just doesn't make sense that so many are wiling to give up their freedom for a false sense of security. We all know deep down that evil will find a way to kill and there is really nothing we can do to stop it but find the root cause and work on that.
Great post! Sadly the local sheriff and his department left the victims hanging dry. The twin FBI agents who also failed to prevent was clear to happen also should be punished to the full extent of the law.
Any liberal blaming innocent, law abiding citizens should get a reality check and perhaps amental evaluation as they can't be thinking straight to accuse anyone else of the act of a mental person who should never had any gun in his possession. The foster parents can't claim not knowing who this guy was!
Since the cops failed the public, we went gun shopping last weekend !
Because the issue is not about one killer, it's about the same thing happening over and over again
Bingo. It's about killers not firearms. So glad someone has correctly identified the problem. You can take the guns away but killers will still kill. Address that issue and America might solve the problem. Ignore it and it'll be the same old same ole.
Great post! Sadly the local sheriff and his department left the victims hanging dry.
I am not so sure the reporting reflects what really happened. Not that I can defend them at this point but I wonder if something important has been left out of the reporting.
I don't believe the average citizen would do any better than trained professionals in a situation of this sort.
Because you need an AK47, AR15, or something similar to be free, right?
Is this because the local robbers are immune to revolver rounds and the deer are immune to buckshot? Or, is it - as is so often the case - the supposed need for weapons of war to "kill duh gubermint?"
Nobody is talking about getting rid of all or even most guns, but not a single person on the far-right has presented a half-way convincing argument as to why they "need" assault weapons vs. other guns, why there should be easy ways around background checks before purchase, why people on the no-fly list can still buy guns, and so on.
Every single defense they present is either hyperbola about the guns they "need to be free," reduction to the absurd about gun laws - "any gun law = taking all our guns away," or just outright lies regarding how "a nation needs lots of guns to be safe," such as ignoring the fact that nearly every other developed nation on the planet has better gun laws, fewer high-end guns, and far less gun crime and crime in general.
This isn't about "freedom," it's about common sense, and it is sad just how many people value their nutty arsenals and extremist views ("kill duh gubermint!") more than the lives of others.
And common sense is , an AR or AK is just another semi auto mag fed firearm. Nothing more. Not sure where you are getting this whole "weapon of war" thing. In fact , the so called "weapon of war" you are talking about couldn't shoot out the hurricane proof windows at that school, and eventually jammed. He also only used 10 round mags, so the high cap thing can't be brought up.
You also claim "nobody is talking about getting rid of all or even most guns... you sure about that ? This proposed bill pretty much bans all semi auto rifles, handguns and shot guns. And even less common sense is the focus on features. Some of which are laughable.
“(A) A semiautomatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
“(i) A pistol grip.
“(ii) A forward grip.
“(iii) A folding, telescoping, or detachable stock.
“(iv) A grenade launcher or rocket launcher.
“(v) A barrel shroud.
“(vi) A threaded barrel.
Forward grips are useless, just look at the people that shoot AR's in competition.
What exactly does a barrel shroud do to make it more "assault weapon" like ? Same with the pistol grip ? You still shoot the gun just like any other rifle.
And not one thing in this bill addresses firearms and the mentally ill, or illegal firearms and the violence in the inner cities. Just an all out ban. Interesting...
A mini-14 is in no way essentially different from an AR-15 for our purposes here. I don't know what the rates of fire are for the two, but my guess is that both would be in the 90-120 round per minute range. Kabar knives are OK, but I would want a Randall #1 if I was in battle. Much better balanced for fighting. I was a gunsmith for four years. Where did you get your firearms training?
Also - for the 87th time - I did not create the term "weapons of war". That is the language of the Fourth Circuit Court which ruled that AR-15s and equivalent are not protected by 2A. Take it up with them.
I guess I'm not understanding what each of these courts are doing. The fourth, like you stated upheld NY's Safe act. The second though, stated there is "some" civilian right to owning an AR. Seems like a pretty grey area to me.
"The Fourth Circuit’s decision goes farther than other decisions upholding assault weapons bans. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York, for example, upheld New York state’s SAFE Act — but also ruled there is some civilian right to own an AR-15, even if the government has a compelling interest in regulating these guns. The ruling by the Fourth Circuit attempted no such balancing act."
Location: Formerly Pleasanton Ca, now in Marietta Ga
10,351 posts, read 8,569,440 times
Reputation: 16693
Quote:
Originally Posted by scarabchuck
What is a "weapon of war" ? an A-10 Warthog ? F-22 ? M1 Abrams ? A nuke in a backpack ?
I keep hearing this new term "weapon of war" ...
I think weapon of war is the new buzz word for anti gunners. It's an incorrect term that stirs up people's anger which is what they love. The assault weapon might be loosing its impact as a way rile up people as more and more the true definition is explained and some anti gunners actually get it.
Even the media is starting to call them "assault style".
So weapon of war is another way to misrepresent facts and stir up emotions.
To some degree anti gunners are like fishermen who tell how big the fish was, the truth gets altered more and more.
I think it would be pretty sad if our military infantry units have to use AR-15 as their weapons of war.
It would be a sad sad situation!
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.
