Guest views are now limited to 12 pages. If you get an "Error" message, just sign in! If you need to create an account, click here.

Jump to content
  • CRYPTO REWARDS!

    Full endorsement on this opportunity - but it's limited, so get in while you can!

Rahm Emanuel: Take American People Out of 2nd Amendment “Debate”


Bumper64
 Share

Recommended Posts

OCDUDE,sorry my analogy is it's not the object that kills. So putting retrictions on objects that might kill is crazy to me,the list would be endless. After you ban/restrict everything on this endless list guess what....................PEOPLE will still kill. So where should we start to solve this dilema............imo punish appropriately and harshly the person/persons responsible. Oh curtail media exploitation would'nt hurt either-peace

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OCDUDE,sorry my analogy is it's not the object that kills. So putting retrictions on objects that might kill is crazy to me,the list would be endless. After you ban/restrict everything on this endless list guess what....................PEOPLE will still kill. So where should we start to solve this dilema............imo punish appropriately and harshly the person/persons responsible. Oh curtail media exploitation would'nt hurt either-peace

Yes, people will still kill people...but not mass quantities in seconds as they did in Aurora and Newtown.THAT is what this is about...not banning ALL guns. NO ONE wants that. Stopping the senseless slaughter is a worthy goal. Punishing the offender AFTERWARD is not enough.

There is ZERO reason to own those kinds of guns EXCEPT to slaughter mass amounts of people in seconds. They belong along with rocket launchers as ILLEGAL to own.

Edited by ocdude
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

NO ONE is taking away your guns...and NO ONE is getting rid of the second amendment.

Even REAGAN wanted assault weapons BANNED and the SC agreed with him.

We have guns.....we just don't need weapons whose sole purpose is mass slaughter in seconds. Why is that so hard to understand? blink.gif/>

Its hard to understand cause you keep talking the same drivel. " Mass slaughter in seconds" hahahahahahaa dude I can mass slaughter in seconds with a 12GA auto. With a .22 hand gun . A gun any gun in the wrong hands can become a assault weapon. wow take away my 30RD Mag but a 10rd mag is ok. hahahaha So you carry 3 mags that you can change out then less then a second. Wow that law is really effective isn't it. My god what a joke. Then we got bleeding hearts like you eating it up with a spoon. pathetic. What the hell is this country coming to. Please do tell me your expertise as to what a assault rifle really is. I am all ears

Edited by dog53
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, people will still kill people...but not mass quantities in seconds as they did in Aurora and Newtown.THAT is what this is about...not banning ALL guns. NO ONE wants that. Stopping the senseless slaughter is a worthy goal. Punishing the offender AFTERWARD is not enough.

There is ZERO reason to own those kinds of guns EXCEPT to slaughter mass amounts of people in seconds. They belong along with rocket launchers as ILLEGAL to own.

So you think those that own these weapons(vast majority law abiding citizens) do so with the sole purpose of "mass slaughter"? I'd like to see the stats to support this claim-peace

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NO ONE is taking away your guns...and NO ONE is getting rid of the second amendment.

Even REAGAN wanted assault weapons BANNED and the SC agreed with him.

We have guns.....we just don't need weapons whose sole purpose is mass slaughter in seconds. Why is that so hard to understand? :blink:/>/>

Where do you even get the term Assault Weapon you don't seem to get what everyone has been saying the weapon can not assault you the a gun is a tool,. Tools do not build houses they can not act with out a human. The problem is with BAD humans the second amendment does not talk about fixing bad humans, leave it alone. Just because a bad HUMAN uses a tool to kill, stop attacking the tool help us enforce the laws we have against bad humans. Kill the killers (death sentence as soon as convicted) eventually the bad will stop being bad for fear of death. All the liberal hubub about protecting this and that is crap they want control of our lives. Ok protect the kids fine put the mentally unstable back in their cages where they belong.

All this gun ban crap is, is just that it will not be enforced therefore not protect anyone from mentally unstable folks from committing crime. Look at all the evidence out there that where any gun ban has been implemented CRIME goes up.

Ohh and you point on cars being inspected annually ................. California nuff said! my :twocents:

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its hard to understand cause you keep talking the same drivel. " Mass slaughter in seconds" hahahahahahaa dude I can mass slaughter in seconds with a 12GA auto. With a .22 hand gun . A gun any gun in the wrong hands can become a assault weapon. wow take away my 30RD Mag but a 10rd mag is ok. hahahaha So you carry 3 mags that you can change out then less then a second. Wow that law is really effective isn't it. My god what a joke. Then we got bleeding hearts like you eating it up with a spoon. pathetic. What the hell is this country coming to. Please do tell me your expertise as to what a assault rifle really is. I am all ears

This definition works for me.

The legal term "Assault Weapon" was most notably used first in the language of the now-expired Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act of 1994, more commonly known as the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, which expired in 2004. The federal assault weapons ban specifically prohibited 19 guns considered to be assault weapons. These were all semi-automatic firearms, meaning that they can eject spent shell casings and chamber the next round without additional human action, but (as opposed to automatic firearms) only one round is fired per pull of the trigger.[13] In addition to the 19 weapons specifically prohibited, the federal assault weapons ban also defined as a prohibited assault weapon any semiautomatic rifle with a detachable magazine and at least two of the following five items: a folding or telescopic stock; a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon; a bayonet mount; a flash suppressor or threaded barrel (a barrel that can accommodate a flash suppressor); or a grenade launcher. The act also defined as a prohibited assault weapon semi-automatic pistols that weighed more than 50 ounces when unloaded or included a barrel shroud, and barred the manufacture of magazines for both pistols and rifles capable of carrying more than 10 rounds.[13]

In the former U.S. law, the legal term assault weapon included certain specific semi-automatic firearm models by name (e.g., Colt AR-15, TEC-9, non-select-fire AK-47s produced by three manufacturers, and Uzis) and other semi-automatic firearms.

And no......the attacks at Newtown or Aurora would not be any where near as horrifying without these guns. Period.

Here in California recently, an UNARMED teacher was able to talk a gunman out of shooting more people because he only had a rifle.

That could not have happened in Newtown.

So you think those that own these weapons(vast majority law abiding citizens) do so with the sole purpose of "mass slaughter"? I'd like to see the stats to support this claim-peace

They have no other use. They are useless for hunting. They should be classified with machine guns as illegal.

Where do you even get the term Assault Weapon you don't seem to get what everyone has been saying the weapon can not assault you the a gun is a tool,. Tools do not build houses they can not act with out a human.

And humans can't build houses without tools. What's your point?

The problem is with BAD humans the second amendment does not talk about fixing bad humans, leave it alone. Just because a bad HUMAN uses a tool to kill, stop attacking the tool help us enforce the laws we have against bad humans.

Just because a bad human has access to something that has no use except mass slaughter means that we shouldn't regulate that tool?

Kill the killers (death sentence as soon as convicted) eventually the bad will stop being bad for fear of death. All the liberal hubub about protecting this and that is crap they want control of our lives. Ok protect the kids fine put the mentally unstable back in their cages where they belong.

First off....many people are mentally ill and show no signs. And no, the death sentence will not stop the mentally ill from killing. BECAUSE THEY ARE MENTALLY ILL.

All this gun ban crap is, is just that it will not be enforced therefore not protect anyone from mentally unstable folks from committing crime. Look at all the evidence out there that where any gun ban has been implemented CRIME goes up.

Um...nope. Look it up. It goes DOWN. And passing laws won't stop people from killing?? Well, then, why have ANY laws AT ALL? :unsure:/>/>

Ohh and you point on cars being inspected annually ................. California nuff said! my :twocents:/>/>/>

In the United States, vehicle safety inspection and emissions inspection are governed by each state individually. 17 states have a periodic (annual or biennial) safety inspection program. HMMM. :P/>/>

Edited by ocdude
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They have no other use. They are useless for hunting. They should be classified with machine guns as illegal.

Solely your opinion .223 caliber (which is the caliber you are referring to) is used widely for hunting coyotes and other medium sized game. So not useless at all. Machine Guns come on you are reaching for the stars with stubs as I said earlier which you still won't get full auto weapons are already illegal and extremely hard to get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This definition works for me.

The legal term "Assault Weapon" was most notably used first in the language of the now-expired Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act of 1994, more commonly known as the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, which expired in 2004. The federal assault weapons ban specifically prohibited 19 guns considered to be assault weapons. These were all semi-automatic firearms, meaning that they can eject spent shell casings and chamber the next round without additional human action, but (as opposed to automatic firearms) only one round is fired per pull of the trigger.[13] In addition to the 19 weapons specifically prohibited, the federal assault weapons ban also defined as a prohibited assault weapon any semiautomatic rifle with a detachable magazine and at least two of the following five items: a folding or telescopic stock; a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon; a bayonet mount; a flash suppressor or threaded barrel (a barrel that can accommodate a flash suppressor); or a grenade launcher. The act also defined as a prohibited assault weapon semi-automatic pistols that weighed more than 50 ounces when unloaded or included a barrel shroud, and barred the manufacture of magazines for both pistols and rifles capable of carrying more than 10 rounds.[13]

In the former U.S. law, the legal term assault weapon included certain specific semi-automatic firearm models by name (e.g., Colt AR-15, TEC-9, non-select-fire AK-47s produced by three manufacturers, and Uzis) and other semi-automatic firearms.

Any body can copy and paste so I can only asume that you know shat about assault weapons

And no......the attacks at Newtown or Aurora would not e any where near as horrifying without these guns. Period.

Actualy yes with a 12ga auto it would have been even more Horrific.

Here in California recently, an UNARMED teacher was able to talk a gunman out of shooting more people because he only had a rifle.

HMMMM and so the rifle made the choice to not shoot any more people.

They have no other use. They are useless for hunting. They should be classified with machine guns as illegal.

They are great for hunting.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This definition works for me.

The legal term "Assault Weapon" was most notably used first in the language of the now-expired Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act of 1994, more commonly known as the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, which expired in 2004. The federal assault weapons ban specifically prohibited 19 guns considered to be assault weapons. These were all semi-automatic firearms, meaning that they can eject spent shell casings and chamber the next round without additional human action, but (as opposed to automatic firearms) only one round is fired per pull of the trigger.[13] In addition to the 19 weapons specifically prohibited, the federal assault weapons ban also defined as a prohibited assault weapon any semiautomatic rifle with a detachable magazine and at least two of the following five items: a folding or telescopic stock; a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon; a bayonet mount; a flash suppressor or threaded barrel (a barrel that can accommodate a flash suppressor); or a grenade launcher. The act also defined as a prohibited assault weapon semi-automatic pistols that weighed more than 50 ounces when unloaded or included a barrel shroud, and barred the manufacture of magazines for both pistols and rifles capable of carrying more than 10 rounds.[13]

In the former U.S. law, the legal term assault weapon included certain specific semi-automatic firearm models by name (e.g., Colt AR-15, TEC-9, non-select-fire AK-47s produced by three manufacturers, and Uzis) and other semi-automatic firearms.

And no......the attacks at Newtown or Aurora would not e any where near as horrifying without these guns. Period.

Here in California recently, an UNARMED teacher was able to talk a gunman out of shooting more people because he only had a rifle.

They have no other use. They are useless for hunting. They should be classified with machine guns as illegal.

You're responses and reasoning amaze me,but ok. If the attacks mentioned had been carried out using different weapontry(is that a word) such as a revolver but killing the same amount of innocent folks we would'nt be having this conversation? Really?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This might sound a little stupid to some of you, but to me, an assault weapon is anything I might be assaulted with---pens, fists, words, knives, rocks, etc.

Anything thats has the possibility of killing multiple innocent people should be banned. I'll start the list 1)pocket knives

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This definition works for me.

The legal term "Assault Weapon" was most notably used first in the language of the now-expired Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act of 1994, more commonly known as the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, which expired in 2004. The federal assault weapons ban specifically prohibited 19 guns considered to be assault weapons. These were all semi-automatic firearms, meaning that they can eject spent shell casings and chamber the next round without additional human action, but (as opposed to automatic firearms) only one round is fired per pull of the trigger.[13] In addition to the 19 weapons specifically prohibited, the federal assault weapons ban also defined as a prohibited assault weapon any semiautomatic rifle with a detachable magazine and at least two of the following five items: a folding or telescopic stock; a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon; a bayonet mount; a flash suppressor or threaded barrel (a barrel that can accommodate a flash suppressor); or a grenade launcher. The act also defined as a prohibited assault weapon semi-automatic pistols that weighed more than 50 ounces when unloaded or included a barrel shroud, and barred the manufacture of magazines for both pistols and rifles capable of carrying more than 10 rounds.[13]

In the former U.S. law, the legal term assault weapon included certain specific semi-automatic firearm models by name (e.g., Colt AR-15, TEC-9, non-select-fire AK-47s produced by three manufacturers, and Uzis) and other semi-automatic firearms.

And no......the attacks at Newtown or Aurora would not be any where near as horrifying without these guns. Period.

Here in California recently, an UNARMED teacher was able to talk a gunman out of shooting more people because he only had a rifle.

That could not have happened in Newtown.

They have no other use. They are useless for hunting. They should be classified with machine guns as illegal.

My AR-10 & 15 have many uses as far as I'm concerned. The primary reason I own guns like this is because I can and its my right per US Constitution! If you have a problem with it, go live in Mexico.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What people that advocate more gun restrictions or bans on semi autos FAIL to understand is that it will not affect the BAD guys from getting these weapons.Last time I checked, heroin and cocaine are illegal BUT there is no problem finding that. Understand this. The only thing that protects our freedom is the fact that WE are a well armed society! Oh by the way I own a silencer for my AR-15 requiring: double finger prints, background checks with both FBI and ATF, signed off by my local chief of police, and purchased through a class 3 dealer to get my federal stamp. Why, because it is my right! I will not recognize ANY law that INFRIGES on the 2nd amendment. PERIOD!

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What people that advocate more gun restrictions or bans on semi autos FAIL to understand is that it will not affect the BAD guys from getting these weapons.Last time I checked, heroin and cocaine are illegal BUT there is no problem finding that. Understand this. The only thing that protects our freedom is the fact that WE are a well armed society! Oh by the way I own a silencer for my AR-15 requiring: double finger prints, background checks with both FBI and ATF, signed off by my local chief of police, and purchased through a class 3 dealer to get my federal stamp. Why, because it is my right! I will not recognize ANY law that INFRIGES on the 2nd amendment. PERIOD!

I'm with you 100%. I need one of those silencers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take American People Out Of The Second Amendment “Debate”?

The professional con artist we have calling the shots for us now blatantly discuss the shift of focus on how to strip us of our constitutional rights without our attention being on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.