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 hold generally Republican values, and I actually do believe in some restrictions on weapons, normally proposed by Democrats. Looking at Nikolas Cruz, that dude should've never been allowed anything sharper than a crayon. I agree, a gun should not be easier to get than a car.
My problem with Democrats, even cheerful college students who have never seen a mean word to me, whose interest in Republican values I have piqued ... still always want one more law. There is "no end in sight" with their ideology.
For the feminist, non cis gendered, pro Muslim, anti misogyny, harpy whatevers (we know the type, they exist), it has never been enough, it isn't enough, it will never be enough. They will always want "just one more".
Good grief is right.. to equate the potential damage from a shotgun to a semi-assault, military style rifle! How come none of our troops then use shotguns if they are as deadly!? Why was one at one time BANNED but not the other!?
Shotguns (depending on what loads are used) only have an effective range of 0-100yds. 0-100yds is exactly the engagement zone inside a large public building but Hardly for open combat distance so it's not suited as a general issue infantry weapon when engagements are 0-500 yds.
And they are used in CQB, breaching doors, room clearing and urban areas.
Stop spewing information you know nothing about. If a person ever says, "I know nothing about guns.....but...I don't think you should have xyz..." you immediately discredit yourself and no one will take anything you say with any validity.
If your trying to incrementally strip rights away at least be knowledgeable on the topic and admit what your true intentions are
Go ahead and make light of it. Even though it has happened throughout the course of human history on a regular basis, over and over and over again. You can label it "commie" if you like, but that has only been one of its names (among many others) in recent history. Tyranny is a better term. Subjugation is another great descriptor. Enslavement works well too.
It takes a pretty closed mind to ignore what is essentially a given with our species--one of the few things that we can all count on happening sooner or later. Both the subjugation of others by one group and the propensity to ignore that it inevitably happens by the other group seems to be hard-coded into our DNA. We are a species of wolves and sheep sharing the same skin.
Yet, you folks, in your arrogance, banality, and officiousness, or perhaps just obliviousness, think that something which has occurred regularly with 100% probability for ten thousand plus years will suddenly never happen again. If you're lucky it won't in our neck of the woods--some generations in some places are lucky that way. Others not so much. But you can bet at some point "the commies" (or whatever other faction succumbs to genetic coding) will come knocking. They always have. And they always will. The innate need to hold power over and subjugate others is too strong a force to be denied for long, let alone forever.
So yeah, an M134 permanently mounted at the bay window of each home with encrypted security activation and each member of the family trained to operate it accurately might just not be such a bad idea after all. It certainly would make a "commie" think twice about his control fetish if there were over a million M134s mounted at the windows of homes across America, hmmmm?
As for the rest of us... what can we say? We understand statistics. And we're sorry you don't.
Outstanding post Chris
Can't rep you again yet, but you've been doing some excellent posts lately. Keep up the good work
Shotguns have an excellent reputation in combat and as man killers in general. One of my bedside guns is a Taurus Judge, 3'' chambers and 3'' barrels. I carry them in vehicles as well. I own several of the riot/ trench gun configuration as well including the the venerable Winchester 1897 and 97 that do not have a disconnector.
I see that a RINO has now surfaced. Be smart; don't respond.
Until 1968 Americans could buy artillery with no restrictions. That's called freedom.
The lives of neither 17,000 children nor seventeen million children are worth the loss of freedom, but the statist dregs squeal about seventeen..
"Gun laws in Vermont regulate the sale, possession, and use of firearms and ammunition in the U.S. state of Vermont.
The state has very few gun control laws, and has among the most permissive laws in the United States regarding the purchase of firearms as well as their open or concealed carry. The state's rural character, along with its strong hunting and outdoor sports traditions, have contributed to the state's permissive gun policies."
Yeh... please do better than simply thinking that liberals is anything anti-conservative.... that's lazy thought. As I said, a few of my very liberal friends are avid gun owners (mostly residing in Texas) and enthusiasts.
Nobody can have what is mine until I am gone. Then I don't care. But, if someone attempts to take what is mine, they better bring the help. And lots of it. Because I can become a pretty violent person if required to. I avoid it usually, but will resurrect it in a heartbeat for thieves and tyrants. I won't die alone. Not by a long shot. I don't care if every other person in this nation thinks I should give up my property, the rights of the individual trump that, and I will die for mine. Not cheaply, understand, so plan for some losses getting it done. If you want a society with no guns in private hands, you might be able to have it, if you are willing to kill enough people to get it. But there are some of us who are willing to kill a whole lot of you to make sure you don't get it, so you better factor that in before you pass a law that starts something you can't stop. Funny thing about those who start wars. They rarely get to choose when it ends.
Good grief is right.. to equate the potential damage from a shotgun to a semi-assault, military style rifle! How come none of our troops then use shotguns if they are as deadly!? Why was one at one time BANNED but not the other!?
That is absolutely false - Combat Shotguns are issues and used by just about, if not every, military force in the world including the United States. They are very effective in close quarter combat, breeching, and crowd control. I believe Mossberg 590 pumps are issued to our military forces and used to good effect in the sand box over there.
All weapons - all guns, knives, swords, etc - were BANNED at one time or another in history.
That is absolutely false - Combat Shotguns are issues and used by just about, if not every, military force in the world including the United States. They are very effective in close quarter combat, breeching, and crowd control. I believe Mossberg 590 pumps are issued to our military forces and used to good effect in the sand box over there.
All weapons - all guns, knives, swords, etc - were BANNED at one time or another in history.
Outstanding post Chris
Can't rep you again yet, but you've been doing some excellent posts lately. Keep up the good work
Thank you.
There are some topics that make my head explode, mainly because of the complete lack of logic and reasoning and common sense displayed by (in this case) the anti-gun crowd. Zero logic. Zero common sense. One hundred percent emotion. Most people know that a decision based solely on emotion has a much greater chance of being a bad one than those based on logic. But not Mr. Lefty.
And the thing is, nearly EVERY argument the Guns-Are-Evil crowd comes up with is based solely, not only on gushy shake-your-head-and-roll-your-eyes emotion, but on a solid logical fallacy, which is even worse. Anti-gun crowd "points" equal anti-logic. They can't even seem to get the definition of "criminal" straight long enough to relate it to the adherence of laws, in general. At the very root, it makes no sense to pass a law to prevent a criminal from breaking that law when we all already know the criminal, by definition, breaks laws. At least those of us with even a minimal degree of logic ability know THAT much.
Mainly laws are in place to provide a consequence for bad behavior. Those laws are already in place. Murder is against the law. But will it stop the murderer from murdering? Nope. What it does (or at least it is supposed to do), via punishment, is prevent the criminal from repeating the crime and serves as an example of consequences for someone thinking of committing that same crime. Unfortunately, as our justice system currently stands in many states, a murderer can look forward to fifty years of free room and board, and instant celebrity in pop culture media. That's not a very effective deterrent. You want to stop them, make the future punishment unthinkably painful (whether capital punishment is used or not) whilst never allowing any publicity and fanfare. That would logically dissuade more would-be killers than saying, "Don't do that Honey. We're going to take away your toys."
I heard a news report this morning about a bombing in Austin (multiple bombings). That is a GREAT example and analogy for the Emotion-Driven-Lefty. Why don't you Lefties ban bombs??? Oh, that's right... they are already illegal. A damn firecracker is illegal. But did that stop whoever is doing this from blowing people up? Nope. There is already a blanket-ban on all bombs for the public, yet there this guy is blowing people up. What is the logical lesson here, Lefties? I shouldn't bother asking, I know, because I haven't heard a logical thought from a gun control nut EVER.
There are some great LOGICAL solutions to this school shooting problem, but that's not really the issue here, is it Lefties?
I am one of the people you fear, who you say want to take away ALL of your guns. Let me reassure you, I have guns myself, pistols and shotguns. No one wants to take away guns that have some reasonable purpose to be owned by everyday citizens............but NO ONE should have assault type weapons that serve no purpose than to spray a bazillion rounds to inflict as much carnage as possible. You can't hunt with them, and if you need one of these to protect yourself, you need to become a better shot.
I can't?
That's strange because I went wild boar hunting just last week, here in Kalifornia of all places, with my AR-15.
AR-15s are the most popular rifle in the US; millions and millions of them are here and legally owned. They aren't going anywhere.
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.
