PDA

View Full Version : Fear of Gun Control



Aaron Homburg
01-28-2013, 09:55 AM
Let me tell you about my Saturday. Needed a blank pistol for training dogs, well as all of you know blank pistols are not the cheapest guns in the world, so talked with a few folks and decided to get a .22 revolver and use it as a blank pistol. Go to the local gun store, keep in mind this is in a town of I kid you not maybe 75 people but one of the major gun outlets in the area, and when I pulled in I counted 13 vehicles at the place and there were a ton of folks in there!! My previous trips to this establishment I have seen maybe 4 or 5 folks there, but Saturday there were 13 cars carrying I swear at least that many folks!! They have one guy that is on the phone with ATF,FBI whomever they call into to clear the sales the whole day. After waiting an hour, got my pistol and scope rings I needed and then waited for the clearance from the FBI for another half hour. The whole time I am there folks are buying guns like were arming a small army!! Folks dropping 2K to 5K without blinking an eye!! Every walk of life and everyone buying shotguns, pistols, rifles and a few assault type weapons. Visited with the owner when we left and he said it was SLOW for a Saturday!! He also told me they are on a slow going out of business sale as they are selling 25x's the amount of guns they are able to get in!! Are you folks seeing the same thing?

Shocker Saturday Regards,

Aaron

savage25xtreme
01-28-2013, 10:13 AM
Yes, our local gun shop which has insanely high prices cant keep rifles of any kind on the shelves.

Let's talk about the choice to go with a .22 pistol... I was about to pull the trigger on a GunX 209 primer gun. Why did you pick a 22 blank pistol?

Mike Boufford
01-28-2013, 10:16 AM
I can believe it. Ammo is almost impossible to find for AR applications, and handgun isn't much better. Thank God that I reload and have supplies on hand. Honest people are afraid of the Dictator in Chief who is hell bent on disarming the law abiding citizen while totalling ignoring the root causes; the open border, free flow of drugs and weapons into this country, the gang related issues, and the mental health industry. This will continue to go on until WE put and end to this madness, and the outright lies coming from the White House.

dixidawg
01-28-2013, 10:28 AM
YES, and has been like that since the Newtown tragedy.

rbr
01-28-2013, 10:29 AM
And why is FEMA and DHS buying millions of rounds of .40acp and .223 ammo?

If you were poll the citizens under 40 years of age weather they thought the Bill of Rights was a written grant of rights to the people by the government or a list of protection of ineliable rights of the people from the government the majority would get it wrong. This is why "We the people"
are losing.

road kill
01-28-2013, 10:32 AM
And why is FEMA and DHS buying millions of rounds of .40acp and .223 ammo?

If you were poll the citezens under 40 years of age weather they thought the Bill of Rights was a written grant of rights to the people by the government or a list of protection of ineliable rights of the people from the government the majority would get it wrong. This is why "We the people"
are losing.
Well, where would they learn about the Constitution?
And if they are not, what does that tell you?

rbr
01-28-2013, 10:46 AM
Subtle indoctrination by selective ommissions and selective emphisis in the curicullum started in the 80s. Why do you think it has been so easy to paint the Tea Party supporters ,who basically want the government to opperate within its constitutional bounds, as extremeists?

Bert

rbr
01-28-2013, 10:58 AM
And the "Fear of un control is legit. Hear in MD a bill has been submitted reclassifying a who list of guns and it has included starter pistols in the general pistol category. That will effectively require us to register our training pistols. It also seeks to limit ammo purchases to 10 rounds per.

The over-reach is here and it is real.

Bert

Dman
01-28-2013, 11:20 AM
4.8 million background checks conducted by the FBI for gun purchasers from FFL dealers in the month of November and December. All time high.
Many people are taking this seriously. It is real.

DoubleHaul
01-28-2013, 11:36 AM
Much bigger town, but the best local gun place here fills up in about five minutes after they open. Not a small place either--they have about 40 employees working, but the place gets so full, they have to close the doors. Every Saturday, there is a line down the other end of the strip mall for folks to get in.

helencalif
01-28-2013, 12:40 PM
Gun shops in No. Calif. are doing a land office business on guns and ammo. About 3 weeks ago my husband stood in line almost 2 hrs. only to learn the gun he wanted to buy was on back order (S & W 38); the shop hoped they might get some in 4 or 5 months. In all, he visited 4 different gun shops. All sold out of S & W and no idea when they might get in their back orders. He decided on a different hand gun. He bought some ammo and waited his 10 days for his background check clearance. Called the store back to buy more ammo. Sorry, we are out indefinitely. He called a lot of stores and finally found one who had some ammo for his new hand gun. He drove 2 hrs. to get to that store.

Our son in law who lives in the Sacramento area had more gun shops and big sporting goods stores to choose from. He bought his S & W in November and bought ammo for it. He decided he better get more to stock up. Sorry. Sold out. He called a lot of stores and it was the same story. Back order on ammo.

One of the retriever clubs I belong to needed to buy a new 12 gauge shotgun to use as a popper gun. The club member who bought it last month had to pay an extra $25 for a background check.

Our club buys its shells in bulk from a large out of state ammo manufacturer. I am thinking it won't be long before the feds pass a law against purchasing ammo out of state. No doubt California will be the first state to support such a law so they can get additional sales tax. No doubt California will be the first state to require paying a $25 fee for a background check to buy ammo -- any ammo, including shotgun shells. I really think that is coming.

Helen

Robert
01-28-2013, 12:58 PM
Seeing the same thing in the state just north of your Aaron. Gun cases are bare. Nothing on the shelfs for the majority of handgun ammo or .223. When it does come in everything goes out of stock again within 4-hours. The lady at the cash register earlier this week said ammo boxes are still cold to the touch as they are leaving the building as soon as they come off the truck. Due to supply and demand you are also limited to the number or rounds or boxes you can purchase.

On a side note one store has a list of over 400 people waiting for a chance to buy an AR.

Mark Teahan
01-28-2013, 01:10 PM
So glad Im a hoarder. I need for nothing. Have all the guns, ammo, and reloading supplies to last the rest of my life.
Just bought 3 cases of steel shot, 3 weeks ago for next year.
I just need 2 new batteries for my mojo's.

Dustin D
01-28-2013, 01:31 PM
@ 10:00 pm Saturday night I put 6 AR15 30 round magazines up for sale on a local Shooting Website.

Less than 28 minutes later they were sold.

Thank You President Obama. NO PRESIDENT IN HISTORY has been better for Firearms and Ammo Sales!

Quite literally, Obama has put more guns in the hands of Americans then any president in US History!

Jen Marenich
01-28-2013, 01:39 PM
Difficult to purchase handgun ammo around here.

Gun_Dog2002
01-28-2013, 01:42 PM
What cracks me up is that nutcase D Feinstien from California keeps saying that all americans are for gun control and want them out of peoples hands. Anyone purchasing a gun is a right wing extremist nut job. At least I'm not alone....

/Paul

huntinman
01-28-2013, 01:57 PM
This is what happens when you question these politicians about it...

EXCLUSIVE: Journalist Accosted by Security over Mayor Bloomberg Gun Control Question
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/01/28/EXCLUSIVE-Journalist-Accosted-By-Security-Over-Mayor-Bloomberg-Gun-Control-Question

BonMallari
01-28-2013, 02:14 PM
here in Las Vegas we just had the SHOT show....Vegas is know for having gun ranges that allow you to try out a fully automatic M4 or similar weapon...The lines at those ranges was at an all time high...We also experienced something in the last couple of week I have never seen here in the state...protesters at those ranges and lines at the gun show which were once scheduled every two months, but are now popping up every two weeks..and those in line at the gun shows cant all be from NV because there arent that many people here, will guess that many are from Southern California

Gerry Clinchy
01-28-2013, 02:50 PM
Did you catch the mention, on the YouTube video posted to the other thread, that the reason behind the "litmus test" in the military, is that the "powers that be" are actually stunned by the firestorm of gun purchasing that is going on in response to those "executive orders" and proposed legislation. They would have, of course, noticed those record numbers of background checks passing through the FBI. It had occurred to me that this administration had just made a major misstep in underestimating the majority of citizens' opinion on the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms.

I'd wager that there are a lot of people who didn't like the sound of the oratory that accompanied the announcement of those executive orders and planned legislation.

Easy to see why the Congress-critters are in favor of all this kind of legislation, as it appears that they will be exempt from these new laws, much like they are exempt from insider trading, SS and Obamacare. On second thought, if they pass these laws, they may, indeed, need some armed protection :-)

Franco
01-28-2013, 02:57 PM
I understand from an exhibtor at the SHOT Show that there were protesters there as well. The reason the SHOT Show moved to Vegas from New Orleans was because the stupid mayor before Ray Nagin decided he wanted to file suit against gun mfg's because of the black on black street crime. The suit didn't go anywhere and the city lost the SHOT Show!

I'm glad I have what I need because the guns stores around here have sold everyhting they can get their hands on. From ammo to AR's & handguns, there ain't much left. Had one store that got in a dozen really pricey AR's in and he posted it on Facebook. He sold them all the next morning!

Dustin D
01-28-2013, 03:15 PM
No doubt about having mine already.

I keep a steady supply of ammo for all firearms owned. Usually in the 300-1000 round range per caliber depending on the firearm etc.

Now watching all this scrounging around I sit back comfortably, smile

.....and still attempt to get more LOL!

Wade
01-28-2013, 03:42 PM
@ 10:00 pm Saturday night I put 6 AR15 30 round magazines up for sale on a local Shooting Website.

Less than 28 minutes later they were sold.

Thank You President Obama. NO PRESIDENT IN HISTORY has been better for Firearms and Ammo Sales!

Quite literally, Obama has put more guns in the hands of Americans then any president in US History!

WOW, some of you people are insane!!! Really, the President? Would you say recent events of slaughter of innocent people might have anything to do with it. Good God man, if you honestly believe you will lose every gun you own before you are planted 6 feet in the ground I think I have a bridge for you to buy. Are you going to lose some of your guns? Yeah probably, as well you should. Are you going to lose them all? Not a chance.

There must be lots and lots of people on this forum who work in the media, because there is a whole lot of sensationalism going on. Don't be so afraid of the shadow you live in.

huntinman
01-28-2013, 03:52 PM
WOW, some of you people are insane!!! Really, the President? Would you say recent events of slaughter of innocent people might have anything to do with it. Good God man, if you honestly believe you will lose every gun you own before you are planted 6 feet in the ground I think I have a bridge for you to buy. Are you going to lose some of your guns? Yeah probably, as well you should. Are you going to lose them all? Not a chance.

There must be lots and lots of people on this forum who work in the media, because there is a whole lot of sensationalism going on. Don't be so afraid of the shadow you live in.

Tell me which of my guns I should lose and why... I have rifles, shotguns and pistols.

Wade
01-28-2013, 03:56 PM
Tell me which of my guns I should lose and why... I have rifles, shotguns and pistols.

Tell me what purpose an assault rifle has in the hands of Joe American?

starjack
01-28-2013, 04:00 PM
wow, some of you people are insane!!! Really, the president? Would you say recent events of slaughter of innocent people might have anything to do with it. Good god man, if you honestly believe you will lose every gun you own before you are planted 6 feet in the ground i think i have a bridge for you to buy. are you going to lose some of your guns? Yeah probably, as well you should. are you going to lose them all? Not a chance.

There must be lots and lots of people on this forum who work in the media, because there is a whole lot of sensationalism going on. Don't be so afraid of the shadow you live in.why second admenment.

Mark Teahan
01-28-2013, 04:07 PM
Hey wade.
Because i am an American, and have a right to own one.
Don't like them, don't buy any.
Leave us Americans alone and gfy.
That's why i have a want to own them.
Do you own a smart car?
If not, why not? You have no need for any other car.
Oh, and recent events have little to do with the sales.
Some are arming themselves for protection from tyranny.

Come and get em, is all i have to say.

starjack
01-28-2013, 04:16 PM
Tell me what purpose an assault rifle has in the hands of Joe American?Tell me what is a assault rifle?

huntinman
01-28-2013, 04:20 PM
Tell me what purpose an assault rifle has in the hands of Joe American?

For whatever they want to legally do with it. Next question.

Wade
01-28-2013, 04:25 PM
It's about common sense. Obviously there are some people who have none.

Mark, don't take things so personal, it's bad for ones health.

road kill
01-28-2013, 04:33 PM
Tell me what purpose an assault rifle has in the hands of Joe American?

Let me guess, you are for legalizing drugs?

Point?
I enjoy the shooting sports as much as "Joe American" enjoys blowin' a doobie.

I'll make you a deal.
If you don't like "Assault weapons," don't get one.
As I don't like "doobies," I won't smoke one.

You mind your business, I'll take care of mine (as provided by the constitution).

There is your "common sense."

BuddyJ
01-28-2013, 04:34 PM
WOW, some of you people are insane!!! Really, the President? Would you say recent events of slaughter of innocent people might have anything to do with it. Good God man, if you honestly believe you will lose every gun you own before you are planted 6 feet in the ground I think I have a bridge for you to buy. Are you going to lose some of your guns? Yeah probably, as well you should. Are you going to lose them all? Not a chance.

There must be lots and lots of people on this forum who work in the media, because there is a whole lot of sensationalism going on. Don't be so afraid of the shadow you live in.

We aren't afraid of the shadow we are afraid of your president

Wade
01-28-2013, 04:36 PM
why second admenment.

What you have isn't going away. What you want might.

Wade
01-28-2013, 04:37 PM
We aren't afraid of the shadow we are afraid of your president

Why? were you afraid of Bush when he talked about the same thing? By the way, I'm not a Democrat

KEITH L
01-28-2013, 04:41 PM
i own a small sporting good store i don't deal in guns but do in ammo. the ffl thing pain in the ass is why. but
i do buy from the largest wholesaler in the nation. i would say 98 to 99% of all ammo is sold out only a
few specialty rounds available, or the real expensive loads. ya hording, ya people are uncomfortable , ya
some are quite stocked up. whatever it is in the u.s.a it is still the right to do whatever is legal. just chill if
your from the far left and don't like seeing a economy grow. i feel obama definetly helped it in this regard.


re-distributed wealth comments sure don't help the situation either


keith l.

starjack
01-28-2013, 04:43 PM
What you have isn't going away. What you want might.You are right not in this house

BuddyJ
01-28-2013, 04:45 PM
Why? were you afraid of Bush when he talked about the same thing? By the way, I'm not a Democrat

No but then Bush did not come up with 23 "dumb ass" executive orders that make about as much since as tits on a bull. And just like Obama Care, which you may also support, it is not about gun control, it's about control of the people. You may want to try a History lesson and read some of Hitler's speeches about gun control in 1935.

Robert
01-28-2013, 04:50 PM
Tell me what purpose an assault rifle has in the hands of Joe American?

Please define "Assult rifle or weapon." Thank you.

Wade
01-28-2013, 04:52 PM
No but then Bush did not come up with 23 "dumb ass" executive orders that make about as much since as tits on a bull. And just like Obama Care, which you may also support, it is not about gun control, it's about control of the people. You may want to try a History lesson and read some of Hitler's speeches about gun control in 1935.

Easy there now, I'm not sure there was a dumber man in the White House than Bushy.

huntinman
01-28-2013, 04:52 PM
Please define "Assult rifle or weapon." Thank you.

He's already been asked that a couple of times... Can't come up with an answer.

Mark Teahan
01-28-2013, 04:53 PM
I may be old, buthave great health still.
Common sense is no longer.
It now called common knowledge.
If one is not exposed to something, they would not have common sense, for they know not.

It all starts with one thing and progresses to more.
Just ask the aussies.
The 2nd isn't about hunting wade, its about us being armed against enemies foreign and DOMESTIC.
Noone has a right to tell me as a free man what i can or cannot own, when i have a right as per our constitution to own what i want.
Go worship your messiah in chief. I for one will never call him "my president"
Bigger gooberment, more debt, more control. I fought against communism, and will not stand by and watch it happen in the country i fought for.
If they come for mine, i WILL take some with me.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Mark Teahan
01-28-2013, 04:59 PM
Here's a current comparison pic for you wade.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v631/splattermatic/obamaandhilter_zps67bc91e5.jpg

Wade
01-28-2013, 05:10 PM
I may be old, buthave great health still.
Common sense is no longer.
It now called common knowledge.
If one is not exposed to something, they would not have common sense, for they know not.

It all starts with one thing and progresses to more.
Just ask the aussies.
The 2nd isn't about hunting wade, its about us being armed against enemies foreign and DOMESTIC.
Noone has a right to tell me as a free man what i can or cannot own, when i have a right as per our constitution to own what i want.
Go worship your messiah in chief. I for one will never call him "my president"
Bigger gooberment, more debt, more control. I fought against communism, and will not stand by and watch it happen in the country i fought for.
If they come for mine, i WILL take some with me.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

God Damn it Mark your Funny. I hope your 2nd job is a comedian because I am laughing my ass off right now.

road kill
01-28-2013, 05:12 PM
God Damn it Mark your Funny. I hope your 2nd job is a comedian because I am laughing my ass off right now.
You should read your own tag line.

huntinman
01-28-2013, 05:13 PM
God Damn it Mark your Funny. I hope your 2nd job is a comedian because I am laughing my ass off right now.

That language is not appropriate on this site

starjack
01-28-2013, 05:14 PM
God Damn it Mark your Funny. I hope your 2nd job is a comedian because I am laughing my ass off right now.Really Really oh boy

BuddyJ
01-28-2013, 05:16 PM
Easy there now, I'm not sure there was a dumber man in the White House than Bushy.

I am so sorry, I must have missed something. I thought this thread was about gun control. And to be considerate of Chris and our other fine moderators I will borrow a line from "Tom Horn" --"That's my final word on the subject."

road kill
01-28-2013, 05:19 PM
I am so sorry, I must have missed something. I thought this thread was about gun control. And to be considerate of Chris and our other fine moderators I will borrow a line from "Tom Horn" --"That's my final word on the subject."
Mr J,
Please know that contrary to popular belief, we here on POTUS try not to talk to each other in this manner.
Oh yeah, we get at it, but the cursing is something we stay away from to a man and woman.

charly_t
01-28-2013, 05:19 PM
You should read your own tag line.

VBG. He has a problem...........he can read but he does not seem to understand what he reads. That tag line proves it. He is a very good example of what our schools are turning out now.

Personally I think 'troll' every time I read a post of his.

Arnie
01-28-2013, 05:21 PM
Wade is from Minnesota. They elected Al Franken. Nuff said!

Wade
01-28-2013, 05:26 PM
You should read your own tag line.

Stan, come on man, I'm just speaking the truth. I was honestly laughing, hard. I wasn't trying to be rude just trying to give the man his due. What he had to say there was funny, in my eyes as the beholder anyway.

By the way, I really did like my grass back in the day, allow mushrooms were my favorite.

BuddyJ
01-28-2013, 05:28 PM
Mr J,
Please know that contrary to popular belief, we here on POTUS try not to talk to each other in this manner.
Oh yeah, we get at it, but the cursing is something we stay away from to a man and woman.

Roadkill, I think you have me (if you are talking about Buddy J) confused with someone else. I have never nor would I ever curse on this forum which is why I replied in my previous post that I would make no further comment. I think you may have been referring to the gentleman from Minn. Have a Nice Day.

Gerry Clinchy
01-28-2013, 05:28 PM
Wade, CT has an assault rifle ban in place.

The Newtown shooter tried to buy a gun, and was turned down. His mother owned the gun he used, and she did not act responsibly in securing them from her son, whom she knew had a mental problem, and was preparing to place him in an institution.

If nobody had any guns, then maybe the shooter would have done less damage in his shooting spree ... unless he found some other way to vent his mental instability.

Joe Biden, himself, said (in good ole Joe's inimitable way) ... that if you want to do some damage, just get yourself some shotgun shells. So, I'd guess if some wacko was listening, the next shooting will be with a shotgun. Thanks, Joe. "The gift that just keeps on giving."

huntinman
01-28-2013, 05:29 PM
Stan, come on man, I'm just speaking the truth. I was honestly laughing, hard. I wasn't trying to be rude just trying to give the man his due. What he had to say there was funny, in my eyes as the beholder anyway.

By the way, I really did like my grass back in the day, allow mushrooms were my favorite.

You might be laughing, but your post was anything but funny.

road kill
01-28-2013, 05:30 PM
Roadkill, I think you have me (if you are talking about Buddy J) confused with someone else. I have never nor would I ever curse on this forum which is why I replied in my previous post that I would make no further comment. I think you may have been referring to the gentleman from Minn. Have a Nice Day.

No sir, I was just telling you that Wade is not a regular here, so please don't think we are like that here.
We are not much for cursing, in fact that may have been a first!!

I know it wasn't you.

Wade
01-28-2013, 05:36 PM
Getting back to the gun thing, I am not against gun ownership as a whole. I do believe in gun restrictions however. Like when you drive a car, you have certain restrictions.
While my views may differ from others I don't see myself as an extremist. There does seem to be some who can not find common ground in the middle unfortunately. It is their way or no way. Life is about change, things evolve, some don't get that aspect of things. In the end though it's all good because we live in this fine country of ours we all have the right to free speech. Whether you like what I have to say or I like what you have to say.

PEACE OUT!!

Mark Teahan
01-28-2013, 05:39 PM
Your an idiot.
Im done on this thread.
I hate having a battle of intelligence with an unarmed person.

road kill
01-28-2013, 05:39 PM
Getting back to the gun thing, I am not against gun ownership as a whole. I do believe in gun restrictions however. Like when you drive a car, you have certain restrictions.
While my views may differ from others I don't see myself as an extremist. There does seem to be some who can not find common ground in the middle unfortunately. It is their way or no way. Life is about change, things evolve, some don't get that aspect of things. In the end though it's all good because we live in this fine country of ours we all have the right to free speech. Whether you like what I have to say or I like what you have to say.

PEACE OUT!!

In the future, as hard as it may be, try to maintain decorum.

Wade
01-28-2013, 05:42 PM
No sir, I was just telling you that Wade is not a regular here, so please don't think we are like that here.
We are not much for cursing, in fact that may have been a first!!

I know it wasn't you.

Come on now Stan, I am a regular here. Every day I'm with you brotha. Don't take the contents or the wording of that previous message out of context. Using a couple of bad words was not meant to be disrepsectful. I was trying to use the words as kind of an exclamation point.

huntinman
01-28-2013, 05:44 PM
Getting back to the gun thing, I am not against gun ownership as a whole. I do believe in gun restrictions however. Like when you drive a car, you have certain restrictions.
While my views may differ from others I don't see myself as an extremist. There does seem to be some who can not find common ground in the middle unfortunately. It is their way or no way. Life is about change, things evolve, some don't get that aspect of things. In the end though it's all good because we live in this fine country of ours we all have the right to free speech. Whether you like what I have to say or I like what you have to say.

PEACE OUT!!

No you don't or you wouldn't have come waltzing in here and told us we must be insane.

zeus3925
01-28-2013, 05:49 PM
The guns aren't the problem. It's the nut behind the gun. The argument should be: How do you keep felons and nuts from getting their hands on guns? Secondly, how are you going to pay to do the same?

Wade
01-28-2013, 05:49 PM
Your an idiot.
Im done on this thread.
I hate having a battle of intelligence with an unarmed person.

OK then, I'm glad that issue has been resolved. Wade's an idiot, a moron if you will. God help him for not having the same views as Mark.

What your problem is Mark is that you are every bit to the right in your views as though people you hate. In other words, you are no different than them, You just can't see it.

By the way, I do own a few shotguns. A Weatherby, a Bennelli, a Keckler-Koch just not an AR.

Wade
01-28-2013, 05:51 PM
No you don't or you wouldn't have come waltzing in here and told us we must be insane.


That sure is a nice looking animal in your avatar. Did you shoot that?

zeus3925
01-28-2013, 05:53 PM
Wade is from Minnesota. They elected Al Franken. Nuff said!

....and Michele Bachman.

huntinman
01-28-2013, 05:54 PM
....and Michele Bachman.

Hey Sarge, one out of two ain't bad...

road kill
01-28-2013, 05:58 PM
....and Michele Bachman.
What delicious irony....."

Bryan Manning
01-28-2013, 06:10 PM
Getting back to the gun thing, I am not against gun ownership as a whole. I do believe in gun restrictions however. Like when you drive a car, you have certain restrictions.
While my views may differ from others I don't see myself as an extremist. There does seem to be some who can not find common ground in the middle unfortunately. It is their way or no way. Life is about change, things evolve, some don't get that aspect of things. In the end though it's all good because we live in this fine country of ours we all have the right to free speech. Whether you like what I have to say or I like what you have to say.

PEACE OUT!!

Okay try not to get involved but this is what kills me on this. What gave you the right to free speech what made us a free country? See what you people have forgotten is that to become a free country we had to fight from tyranny WITH A GUN!And it was written to always protect this country from that happening again. You want free speech and you want me to tolerate that but you don't want me to have the right to arm myself with what ever I see fit. So I'll I say when your president comes to shut you up you spew your nonsense and ill spew 5.56's!

Brian Courser
01-28-2013, 06:21 PM
No but then Bush did not come up with 23 "dumb ass" executive orders that make about as much since as tits on a bull. And just like Obama Care, which you may also support, it is not about gun control, it's about control of the people. You may want to try a History lesson and read some of Hitler's speeches about gun control in 1935.

I thought that quote was as useful as tits on a boar hog. That is what my granddad always said at least

BuddyJ
01-28-2013, 06:32 PM
I thought that quote was as useful as tits on a boar hog. That is what my granddad always said at least
Brian, you are 100% correct: but tits on a bull are useless too and "bull was coming to mind when I read that guys post. :-)

Wade
01-28-2013, 06:36 PM
Brian, you are 100% correct: but tits on a bull are useless too and "bull was coming to mind when I read that guys post. :-)

Here in Minnesota we like to say, useless as Tits on a Bull. But maybe we should use breasts cuz we wouldn't want to use foul words for fear of upsetting someone.

huntinman
01-28-2013, 06:38 PM
Here in Minnesota we like to say, useless as Tits on a Bull. But maybe we should use breasts cuz we wouldn't want to use foul words for fear of upsetting someone.

Or be banned from the forum...:rolleyes:

Brian Courser
01-28-2013, 06:42 PM
Brian, you are 100% correct: but tits on a bull are useless too and "bull was coming to mind when I read that guys post. :-)

I agree there is a lot of bull going on in this thread. I did pick up an M&P 40 this past weekend it was the last one they had in stock. I can't believe how many people think that restricting guns and gun ownership will prevent crime. It is not the good people doing harm. It those who are intent on doing harm or committing crime that need to be restricted by our current laws

BuddyJ
01-28-2013, 06:49 PM
I agree there is a lot of bull going on in this thread. I did pick up an M&P 40 this past weekend it was the last one they had in stock. I can't believe how many people think that restricting guns and gun ownership will prevent crime. It is not the good people doing harm. It those who are intent on doing harm or committing crime that need to be restricted by our current laws
That is a nice weapon and I agree with your post completely buy these libs are not about gun control, they are about control of the people and if step by step they can disarm the people then they have complete control

sick lids
01-28-2013, 06:49 PM
Wade would you consider your benelli an assault weapon if it had a pistol grip, or would it be a benelli with a pistol grip. At the ranges these mass shootings are happening at these gunmen would have killed a lot more people with a benelli and buck shot.

And as far as restrictions on cars I can think of none that say what kind I can own or operate on my property. Or any that bars felons or mentally ill people from purchasing them.

How many of these mass shooters drove cars to the scene, should we ban cars also. I don't remember any one of them wearing a dress, maybe the POTUS should put out an order for us all to wear dresses.

Did you know more people are killed yearly with hammers than all rifles combined?. How about hammers.

zeus3925
01-28-2013, 06:52 PM
I agree there is a lot of bull going on in this thread. I did pick up an M&P 40 this past weekend it was the last one they had in stock. I can't believe how many people think that restricting guns and gun ownership will prevent crime. It is not the good people doing harm. It those who are intent on doing harm or committing crime that need to be restricted by our current laws
OK then how are you going to keep the firearms away from nuts and felons so we can have and enjoy ours?

sick lids
01-28-2013, 06:56 PM
Very easy, tatoo felon on felon's forheads and nuts on nutso's armpits, and leave the rest of law abiding people alone.

huntinman
01-28-2013, 06:57 PM
OK then how are you going to keep the firearms away from nuts and felons so we can have and enjoy ours?

If they break the law lock them up... If not... Things happen, you can't stop everything. Can't stop all car wrecks from happening either, but we don't take all the cars off the road.

zeus3925
01-28-2013, 07:19 PM
If they break the law lock them up... If not... Things happen, you can't stop everything. Can't stop all car wrecks from happening either, but we don't take all the cars off the road.

Agree, Huntinman, that you can't stop all of them. But, like putting safety belts in cars, there are things that can be done to reduce the slaughter. As a article I posted last week from the Star-Tribune, a convicted felon and a former mental patient ended up with a collection of over 20 guns. From his own writings, he was fighting a demon inside that was about to break loose. He was able to acquire an AK47, a Tommie gun and numerous handguns because of a number of factors. Since the murder he he committed as a juvenile didn't appear on a background check. His mental health history did not either. He was able to acquire some of those guns at private sales and gun shows.

First, I believe government agencies need to get serious about keeping records updated on prohibited purchasers of fire arms. I am in favor of background checks on any firearm purchase. 10 rounds in a magazine is plenty unless your Indian name is Lucky Deer. Beyond that I'm not willing to go.

Brian Courser
01-28-2013, 07:24 PM
OK then how are you going to keep the firearms away from nuts and felons so we can have and enjoy ours?

All records need to be abled to be shared by all agencies. Zero tolerence for those that use firearms to commit crimes no plea bargning. No large media coverage of mass shootings equals no 15 mins of shame or aknowledgement for their actions. Indiviual responsibilty is a great thing. And everyone needs too be held accountable for their actions. Anyone found with a non registered hand gun or stolen gun is straight to jail no questions.

BuddyJ
01-28-2013, 07:57 PM
Agree, Huntinman, that you can't stop all of them. But, like putting safety belts in cars, there are things that can be done to reduce the slaughter. As a article I posted last week from the Star-Tribune, a convicted felon and a former mental patient ended up with a collection of over 20 guns. From his own writings, he was fighting a demon inside that was about to break loose. He was able to acquire an AK47, a Tommie gun and numerous handguns because of a number of factors. Since the murder he he committed as a juvenile didn't appear on a background check. His mental health history did not either. He was able to acquire some of those guns at private sales and gun shows.

First, I believe government agencies need to get serious about keeping records updated on prohibited purchasers of fire arms. I am in favor of background checks on any firearm purchase. 10 rounds in a magazine is plenty unless your Indian name is Lucky Deer. Beyond that I'm not willing to go.
10 rounds is okay? Does that mean you think it is okay to shoot 10 people but not 12 or fifteen. I know that is a stupid question and is not at all what you meant; my point is it is not okay to shoot anyone, it's not the guns or the size of the magazines that are the problem. the cities where we have the strictest gun control laws are where the biggest problems are. The were more people killed in Chicago last month than by the Taliban. The whole gun control issue is fertile ground for sick politicians, who are clueless, to further there agendas and divide the country. Think about it, even if we could only have a five round clip what's to keep someone from carrying 5 or 6 clips, or even more?

sick lids
01-28-2013, 08:01 PM
Zeus I fully respect all of your opinions and agree with many of them to a point but passing laws that punish or restrict law abiding people for crimes that others commit is nonsense. The idea that the government is going to have any control of guns in the very near future is laughable as technology will always out pace laws. For instance google "defence distributed" and tell me how they can stop that, it has gone world wide, and the tech for making these out of metal is already here just very expensive.

zeus3925
01-28-2013, 08:34 PM
Zeus I fully respect all of your opinions and agree with many of them to a point but passing laws that punish or restrict law abiding people for crimes that others commit is nonsense. The idea that the government is going to have any control of guns in the very near future is laughable as technology will always out pace laws. For instance google "defence distributed" and tell me how they can stop that, it has gone world wide, and the tech for making these out of metal is already here just very expensive.

I don't see background checks or limited capacity magazines as punishing or a restriction on law abiders. However, I feel we should choke off the ability nuts and felons to obtain firearms without a background check.

If you have different ideas I'd like to hear them. If we don't get a handle on mass killings and gun violence, we will see the either the real or de facto repeal of the second amendment as the forces that want to abolish gun ownership will gain strength with every Columbine and Sandy Hook.

HPL
01-28-2013, 08:38 PM
WOW, some of you people are insane!!! Really, the President? Would you say recent events of slaughter of innocent people might have anything to do with it. Good God man, if you honestly believe you will lose every gun you own before you are planted 6 feet in the ground I think I have a bridge for you to buy. Are you going to lose some of your guns? Yeah probably, as well you should. Are you going to lose them all? Not a chance.

There must be lots and lots of people on this forum who work in the media, because there is a whole lot of sensationalism going on. Don't be so afraid of the shadow you live in.


Tell me what purpose an assault rifle has in the hands of Joe American?

To begin with, let me say that I don't have any guns or ammo nor do I know anyone who does (shut up you idiots ;-) )

Now, why should law abiding gun owners lose possessions which they are legally entitled to own? Although I don't own one, I had the opportunity to fire an AR a few weeks ago and man that was FU-UH-UNNN!!! The part about Feinstein's bill that really scares me is that for the first time, they are enumerating what guns we CAN own. NOT the way I interpret "shall not be infringed". What manny people seem to believe is that the govt gives US citizens the right to own guns. That is not what the 2nd amendment says/. The second amendment says that owning guns is a right (like the other "rights enumerated in the "BILL OF RIGHTS") and that the government cannot legitimately deny us that right, Period.

As to the purpose of light, scary looking (to some folks) semi-auto long guns in the hands of hunters, well, they have become very popular in my area for shooting hogs from helicopters (we have a plague of feral hogs here and this is proving to be a viable management technique). Now, I can't say that there are a lot of folks doing that as it is not a poor-man's sport, but there are those who can afford it, and so that's one example. Considering the low recoil and small bullet, I suspect that they also have potential agains prairie dogs and other small game. Did I mention that they are really sweet to shoot?

HPL
01-28-2013, 08:51 PM
If you have different ideas I'd like to hear them. If we don't get a handle on mass killings and gun violence, we will see the either the real or de facto repeal of the second amendment as the forces that want to abolish gun ownership will gain strength with every Columbine and Sandy Hook.

First, we don't need to get a handle on "mass shootings'. Statistically, they are almost non-existant and represent such a small hazard in the US as to make all the hoopla almost ludicrous. Gun violence is another matter, and unfortunately we can't really discuss that because it mostly occurs in poor (black) urban areas.

Aaron Homburg
01-28-2013, 08:52 PM
Yes, our local gun shop which has insanely high prices cant keep rifles of any kind on the shelves.

Let's talk about the choice to go with a .22 pistol... I was about to pull the trigger on a GunX 209 primer gun. Why did you pick a 22 blank pistol?
Went with the .22 due to cost and I can use it for other things as well.
Well Meaning Thread Regards,

Aaron

HPL
01-28-2013, 08:57 PM
Went with the .22 due to cost and I can use it for other things as well.
Well Meaning Thread Regards,

Aaron

Did kinda go rogue for a while there, didn't it?

zeus3925
01-28-2013, 09:05 PM
First, we don't need to get a handle on "mass shootings'. Statistically, they are almost non-existant and represent such a small hazard in the US as to make all the hoopla almost ludicrous. Gun violence is another matter, and unfortunately we can't really discuss that because it mostly occurs in poor (black) urban areas.

I don't agree that gun violence is a black issue at all. I have seen gun violence in every type of cultural setting. Even so it is an issue of the destruction of human life. La Pierre is right about the cultural issues of gun violence. We are making the image as of the dude that carries heat as the mean Mother that rules the block. But, into this mix his answer is more guns. Don"t talk to you neighbor, fear him instead. Fear begets more fear and that translates into more sales for the manufacturers.

HPL
01-28-2013, 09:21 PM
I don't agree that gun violence is a black issue at all. I have seen gun violence in every type of cultural setting. Even so it is an issue of the destruction of human life. La Pierre is right about the cultural issues of gun violence. We are making the image as of the dude that carries heat as the mean Mother that rules the block. But, into this mix his answer is more guns. Don"t talk to you neighbor, fear him instead. Fear begets more fear and that translates into more sales for the manufacturers.


I'm not saying that white folks don't use guns to commit violent acts, but everything I have read (no I don't have the references) seems to indicate that gun violence is a disproportionate problem in urban black settings. NO, it's NOT a genetic thing, it's not because their skin is black, but something about the culture of those populations appears to lead them to place a lower value on human life.

huntinman
01-28-2013, 09:24 PM
I'm not saying that white folks don't use guns to commit violent acts, but everything I have read (no I don't have the references) seems to indicate that gun violence is a disproportionate problem in urban black settings. NO, it's NOT a genetic thing, it's not because their skin is black, but something about the culture of those populations appears to lead them to place a lower value on human life.

Drugs... And gangs. Chicago. Toughest gun control laws in the country... 500+ murders last year. More gun control laws there will not do squat.

zeus3925
01-28-2013, 09:50 PM
If you excuse the metaphor here, there is no magic bullet. Total gun bans will not eliminate violence. On this most of us agree.

The culture has within it many streams that feed a river of violence. There are too many movies and video games feeding too many fatherless children false images of what manhood should look like. Add to that the desperation of urban poverty and flavor it with a mixture of drugs and you have a nasty soup. But, even kids growing up in suburbia are fed nonstop portrail of gun violence.

Dan Storts
01-28-2013, 09:51 PM
I don't see background checks or limited capacity magazines as punishing or a restriction on law abiders. However, I feel we should choke off the ability nuts and felons to obtain firearms without a background check.

If you have different ideas I'd like to hear them. If we don't get a handle on mass killings and gun violence, we will see the either the real or de facto repeal of the second amendment as the forces that want to abolish gun ownership will gain strength with every Columbine and Sandy Hook.


We should use the same standards as the government now has on buying fertilizer which was use in the Oklahoma City bombing. This was the largest mass murder is U.S. history carrier out by a single individual. We could start banning the mentally ill from farming but I don't remember ever having to get a background check for diesel fuel, etc, etc.

Background check only applies to U.S. citizens. Fast and furious purchases go to the express checkout line. 12 items or more PLEASE.

Dan Storts
01-28-2013, 09:54 PM
If you excuse the metaphor here, there is no magic bullet. Total gun bans will not eliminate violence. On this most of us agree.

The culture has within it many streams that feed a river of violence. There are too many movies and video games feeding too many fatherless children false images of what manhood should look like. Add to that the desperation of urban poverty and flavor it with a mixture of drugs and you have a nasty soup. But, even kids growing up in suburbia are fed nonstop portrail of gun violence.

The long and short of it. People really should have a background check to able to become a parent.

sick lids
01-28-2013, 09:59 PM
The funny thing about the people who will increasingly want to ban guns as the shootings continue is that they will bring this country to an end quicker and quicker.

Historically democratic governments have not lasted more than 200-300 years. What has always happens is that the masses start to vote for more and more benefits because they can, until the the government can no longer tax the people working to support those that don't. Our fore fathers knew this and that is why our federal government is a republic, not a democracy as taught in school. If you don't think that our current government dose not also understand this I would think you a fool. As our country falls deeper into debt with no way out I would assume that taking all guns away will be a top priority. As they will be blamed for all that has happened but most of the responsibility will be on our shoulders, incremently.

I would think that our fore fathers would think that we are already slaves to the federal government.

Will my kids live as free as I have? I have not lived as free as my parents, they have not lived as free as their parents.

It's a natural cycle with humans, freedom,oppression, usually oppression lasts far longer!

zeus3925
01-28-2013, 10:10 PM
The funny thing about the people who will increasingly want to ban guns as the shootings continue is that they will bring this country to an end quicker and quicker.

Historically democratic governments have not lasted more than 200-300 years. What has always happens is that the masses start to vote for more and more benefits because they can, until the the government can no longer tax the people working to support those that don't. Our fore fathers knew this and that is why our federal government is a republic, not a democracy as taught in school. If you don't think that our current government dose not also understand this I would think you a fool. As our country falls deeper into debt with no way out I would assume that taking all guns away will be a top priority. As they will be blamed for all that has happened but most of the responsibility will be on our shoulders, incremently.

I would think that our fore fathers would think that we are already slaves to the federal government.

Will my kids live as free as I have? I have not lived as free as my parents, they have not lived as free as their parents.

It's a natural cycle with humans, freedom,oppression, usually oppression lasts far longer!

Population density is a greater threat to your liberty. With population density you get a demand more rules and ordinances so people don't infringe rights of other people.

Matt McKenzie
01-28-2013, 10:20 PM
Are there more deaths per capita due to gun violence now than there were in say 1873, 1927 or 1957?

JDogger
01-28-2013, 10:46 PM
Are there more deaths per capita due to gun violence now than there were in say 1873, 1927 or 1957?

Do you have something you want to cite Hookset? JD

sick lids
01-28-2013, 10:47 PM
I think it has declined along with violent crime.

sick lids
01-28-2013, 10:52 PM
Population density is a greater threat to your liberty. With population density you get a demand more rules and ordinances so people don't infringe rights of other people.

so true then are we nearing a critical point, every specie is its worst enemy type thing?

HPL
01-28-2013, 11:01 PM
Population density is a greater threat to your liberty. With population density you get a demand more rules and ordinances so people don't infringe rights of other people.

Been my battlecry for a good 35 years at least! My wife and I did our part. All our kids have been adopted (and had 4 feet) (and we've never had a flock of them either).

dixidawg
01-29-2013, 07:34 AM
Tell me what purpose an assault rifle has in the hands of Joe American?

If by "assault rifle" I assume you are referring to what Dept of Homeland Security calls a "Personal Defense Weapon"?

https://www.fbo.gov/utils/view?id=09c3d5e933bc24416b752b57294a17b3

Notice the term assault weapon or assault rifle is not used anywhere in the document. The “assault weapon” terminology is only used for non-LEOs and non-military who own those firearms.
The scope of this contract is to provide a total of up to 7,000 5.56x45mm North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) personal defense weapons (PDW) throughout the life of this contract to numerous Department of Homeland Security components. …
In paragraph 3.1 under requirements and testing standards we read…

DHS and its components have a requirement for a 5.56x45mm NATO, select-fire firearm suitable for personal defense use in close quarters and/or when maximum concealment is required.
Isn’t that inconvenient for the gun control politicians? In requirement paragraph 3.9.10, they find a need for a 30-round magazine.

The action shall be capable of accepting all standard NATO STANAG 20 and 30 round M16 magazines (NSN 1005-00-921-5004) and Magpul 30 round PMAG (NSN 1005-01-576-5159). The magazine well shall be designed to allow easy insertion of a magazine.
In paragraph 3.21.2, they again specify the requirement for a 30-round magazine.

The magazine shall have a capacity to hold thirty (30) 5.56x45mm NATO rounds.
If you did not catch the interesting part in one of the quoted sentences above, let me point it out to you. The personal defense weapon should be select-fire capable.

DHS and its components have a requirement for a 5.56x45mm NATO, select-fire firearm suitable for personal defense use in close quarters…
The action shall be select-fire (capable of semi-automatic and automatic fire).
From the Fire Control Section, paragraph 3.10.1.

The fire control selector shall have three positions; safe, semi-automatic, and automatic. The selector shall have positions which are clearly labeled for the mode of fire.
This formal DHS RFP – which is specific concerning requirements – clearly indicates a select-fire rifle is appropriate for personal defense in close quarters. If it is appropriate for law enforcement, why is it not appropriate for civilian use? (Select-fire/automatic capable weapons are generally not used in situations where you need accuracy; like for home defense.)


http://radioviceonline.com/department-of-homeland-security-sport-rifle-ar-15-suitable-for-personal-defense/

dixidawg
01-29-2013, 07:47 AM
Or maybe the Mass State Police?

http://www.mlefiaa.org/files/MPTC_NEWS/Patrol_Rifle_Student_Manual_2010.pdf

They call it a "Patrol Rifle"

"We have found most officers have difficulty hitting the MPTC Q target with regularity using their service pistol at distances further than the 10 yard line. Now, factor in the stress level of a life and death encounter with rapidly evolving circumstances – the actual hit ratio drops even further. Beyond 15 yards the shotgun with multiple round projectile, may yield more hit potential however the recoil and manual operation of the shotgun has historically proved to be an issue with some Officers. If the load is buck shot, beyond 18 yards the shot spread will begin to exceed the width of the torso. This violates the accountability for all rounds down range rule. The slug round provides the logical alternative with longer range, more accuracy and no shot spread. It also has greater penetration which can be considered both a positive and negative factor when considering its use in urban areas or near thin walled homes. Conversely, the most popular patrol rifle round, the 5.56mm NATO (.223 Remington) will penetrate fewer walls than service pistol rounds or 12 gauge slugs.
The rifle is a superior tool. It allows the officer to either stand off from the threat or, if the situation requires, advance to the threat with the confidence that the tool in their hands can deal with almost any perceived threat. It has the power to deliver lethal terminal ballistics to the threat. It has a larger magazine capacity than our service pistol or shotgun. The longer sight radius makes it potentially a more accurate weapon which lowers the liability to the department."


Why wouldn't this also apply to non LEOs?

Dustin D
01-29-2013, 05:34 PM
WHY does anyone NEED an ASSAULT RIFLE?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0R3uLTnzs60

huntinman
01-29-2013, 06:00 PM
WHY does anyone NEED an ASSAULT RIFLE?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0R3uLTnzs60

Well said.

Pete
01-29-2013, 07:01 PM
http://www.youtube.com/embed/F584p5kJL-U?feature=player_detailpage

This guy is no dummy,,,, why the 2nd is so important,,
Pete

Wade
01-29-2013, 07:03 PM
Well said.

NOT!! Listen carefully at the 1:30 mark what he states about protection. It's a contradiction

huntinman
01-29-2013, 07:36 PM
NOT!! Listen carefully at the 1:30 mark what he states about protection. It's a contradiction

Somebody hear an annoying buzzing sound?

Dustin D
01-29-2013, 07:47 PM
NOT!! Listen carefully at the 1:30 mark what he states about protection. It's a contradiction

How you figure?

sick lids
01-29-2013, 07:50 PM
So wade would you consider your benelli an assult weapon if it had a pistol grip, or would it be a benelli with a pistol grip?

Cody Covey
01-29-2013, 08:14 PM
Sarge, I will agree with the background check issue. It affects me negatively but it is something that could possibly help to curb some gun purchases (Although not many). But the magazine issue is completely stupid. If someone is going to go on a mass shooting spree they ALWAYS bring tons of mags along and they are able to reload quickly. Limiting to 10 rounds does nothing when I can reload in less than 3 seconds. It is a rule that will ONLY hurt law abiding citizens. period.

wayne anderson
01-29-2013, 09:49 PM
I have no issue with buying so-called "assult weapons" or expanding the background check system if it will limit those who should not acquire weapons (felons, mentally unstable, etc.) from acquiring them. What does scare me is the ability of all those rushing to the gun stores to buy guns to know how to safely use them. I see too many stories about someone (or someone's kid) accidentally hurting or killing themselves or someone else by using the "unloaded" weapon. I personally prefer a short-barrel 12-ga. shotgun for personal defense--looks scary to perp and can do plenty of damage.

Ron in Portland
01-29-2013, 09:59 PM
NOT!! Listen carefully at the 1:30 mark what he states about protection. It's a contradiction

So, what I hear at the 1:30 mark is the he answers the question about why he wants an "assault rifle", is to defend himself against someone attacking him with one. He does go on to say that even if an attacker didn't have an "assault rifle", he would still want one. Why? If you're under attack, you would always want to be better armed than your attacker.

What's the contradiction you're referring to?

North Mountain
01-30-2013, 12:57 AM
Folks need to be careful about what they post on a public forum. Admission of drug use and possession of firearms is a federal offense. Punishment is pretty severe. I learned about this when I served on a federal court. Here's a link that outlines the law. http://www.justice.gov/usao/ut/psn/documents/guncard.pdf

Wade
01-30-2013, 06:07 AM
So, what I hear at the 1:30 mark is the he answers the question about why he wants an "assault rifle", is to defend himself against someone attacking him with one. He does go on to say that even if an attacker didn't have an "assault rifle", he would still want one. Why? If you're under attack, you would always want to be better armed than your attacker.

What's the contradiction you're referring to?

3 quick questions regarding the defense of one self.

1) What type of gun would one most likely have by his bed in case of a home intruder?

2) What type of gun would one most likely have in ones car in close proximity to defend ones self?

3) What type of gun would one have the ability to carry on ones self to fend off an attacker?

If your answer to any of the 3 is anything but a hand gun your either a liar or dillusional. To defend ones self with a Bush Master or any other "assault rifle" is truly a bogus argument in the way we go about our daily lives. Now, if you want to say that your sitting at the window waiting 24/7 for any intruder. well then I am in complete agreement with you. However if that is the case what type of life are you living? A life of fear!!

Pete
01-30-2013, 06:22 AM
3 quick questions regarding the defense of one self.

1) What type of gun would one most likely have by his bed in case of a home intruder?

2) What type of gun would one most likely have in ones car in close proximity to defend ones self?

3) What type of gun would one have the ability to carry on ones self to fend off an attacker?

If your answer to any of the 3 is anything but a hand gun your either a liar or dillusional. To defend ones self with a Bush Master or any other "assault rifle" is truly a bogus argument in the way we go about our daily lives. Now, if you want to say that your sitting at the window waiting 24/7 for any intruder. well then I am in complete agreement with you. However if that is the case what type of life are you living? A life of fear!!

However against a tyrannical government,,,, I would like a 50 cal mounted to my copula,,,,,,,,,Bar's for the kids and wife ,,,, and a closet full of stinger missiles.
Look at Switzerland,,their citizens harbor all these plus hand granades and they have extremely low violent crime,,,,

Pete
01-30-2013, 06:29 AM
http://www.theblessingsofliberty.com/articles/article11.html

Wade
01-30-2013, 06:35 AM
Somebody hear an annoying buzzing sound?

It's to bad a differing opinion is considered an annoyance. Maybe that's why there is no compromise in Washington these days.

Franco
01-30-2013, 06:46 AM
http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/s480x480/14904_459272590793578_1060551720_n.jpg

road kill
01-30-2013, 06:47 AM
3 quick questions regarding the defense of one self.

1) What type of gun would one most likely have by his bed in case of a home intruder?

2) What type of gun would one most likely have in ones car in close proximity to defend ones self?

3) What type of gun would one have the ability to carry on ones self to fend off an attacker?

If your answer to any of the 3 is anything but a hand gun your either a liar or dillusional. To defend ones self with a Bush Master or any other "assault rifle" is truly a bogus argument in the way we go about our daily lives. Now, if you want to say that your sitting at the window waiting 24/7 for any intruder. well then I am in complete agreement with you. However if that is the case what type of life are you living? A life of fear!!

Classy!!!

By your standards I am a "liar and delusional"
I would suggest not illegally entering my home!

I do NOT have a handgun at the ready!!!!

12 guage regards..............

huntinman
01-30-2013, 06:57 AM
Classy!!!

By your standards I am a "liar and delusional"
I would suggest not illegally entering my home!

I do NOT have a handgun at the ready!!!!

12 guage regards..............

20 gauge and handgun here. Both ready at all times. (Only reason it's a 20 is, it's my wife's gun and she is comfortable shooting it)

Wade
01-30-2013, 07:00 AM
Classy!!!

By your standards I am a "liar and delusional"
I would suggest not illegally entering my home!

I do NOT have a handgun at the ready!!!!

12 guage regards..............

Stan, please do us the favor of answering each question individually. That would certainly help to clarify things.

Wade
01-30-2013, 07:01 AM
20 gauge and handgun here. Both ready at all times. (Only reason it's a 20 is, it's my wife's gun and she is comfortable shooting it)

please answer each question individually.

Dustin D
01-30-2013, 07:04 AM
3 quick questions regarding the defense of one self.

1) What type of gun would one most likely have by his bed in case of a home intruder?

2) What type of gun would one most likely have in ones car in close proximity to defend ones self?

3) What type of gun would one have the ability to carry on ones self to fend off an attacker?

If your answer to any of the 3 is anything but a hand gun your either a liar or dillusional. To defend ones self with a Bush Master or any other "assault rifle" is truly a bogus argument in the way we go about our daily lives. Now, if you want to say that your sitting at the window waiting 24/7 for any intruder. well then I am in complete agreement with you. However if that is the case what type of life are you living? A life of fear!!

Home;
1: 12 Ga. Shotgun or High Powered Carbine with Personal Defense Ammunition. The shotgun is one of the easiest most reliable self defense weapon to date. It's easy to handle and easy to shoot. No acute aiming needed. Point and pull the trigger. The Carbine is also easy to utilize, very accurate and holds up to 30 rounds of ammunition. Both give the Home Owner maximum efficiency with options such as Lasers and Lights. Both give the Home Owner maximum effectiveness in being able to hit what hes aiming at in the dark within 21 feet while delivering the effectiveness of a High Powered Rifle Cartridge or the devastation of Shotgun Defense Ammo.

Vehicle;
2: Handgun and/or 18" Shotgun. The handgun in the vehicle is the best choice considering the close quarters of a vehicle. It can be easily manipulated without interference from the steering wheel, console seatbelt etc.
-Also considering that once exiting the vehicle you will most likely be holstering the handgun on your person, it is the ideal firearm to carry in your vehicle.
-However an 18" shotgun in a Lock Arm at the ready is completely ideal for City dwellers and is something that will remain in the vehicle until back home.

Person;
3: Considering today’s panty waste society the mere sight of a gun strikes fear and panic into the hearts of American Citizens. So Concealing a Handgun is the best choice for both Tactical Concerns and sadly political concerns as well. Carrying the most effective weapon is not an option these days b/c of the panic that would ensue. Walking around with a Rifle or Shotgun (More effective than a Handgun) isn't possible these days. But it used to be.

Now I'm neither a liar or delusional. I base these decision off of training and experience. Both of which it seems you severely lack. No Defense instructor on the palnet would recommend anything other than a Shotgun in the House for MAXIMUM effective use.

I've provided reasonable and logical solutions and answers yet you still haven't attempted to answer some of the questions directed towards you in this thread.



It's to bad a differing opinion is considered an annoyance. Maybe that's why there is no compromise in Washington these days.

It's an annoyance b/c of what I stated above. Instead of providing the logic behind your obtuse statements you just set keep rambling on.

No Compromise in Washington you say? Look in the mirror! You start a statement off with pure ignorance about which weapon where and then in the same statement call people ignorant and delusional.

You ARE a true liberal. Not sure if you’ve figured that out yet. You automatically form the opinion that anyone who disagrees with you, are liars or stupid or delusional (Yea that screams compromise right? right? right....) and like Liberals are the champions of setting up Strawman arguments. Giving your opponent and view that they don’t have and then arguing and winning against that view.

Pathetic....

Wade
01-30-2013, 07:34 AM
Dustin, my argument is about the big push on the assault rifles, bush masters, ar 15. If one is talking about these types of guns to defend ones self I don't see the logic in the argument.
I asked those questions to try to point out the fact the defending ones self in those areas of vulnerability one would more than likely not have one of those weapons available at the time of attack.
When one is a sleep, more times than not one would have a hand gun in close proximity.
When one is in his/her car one would most likely have a hand gun in the glove box.
When one is walking down the street one would most likely be carrying a hand gun.

To use the reasoning of defense for the purpose of owning the above mentioned weapon in my opinion is off the mark.

As I mentioned, if I'm sitting at home waiting for them to come and I am prepared then yes, I would like more power. But I am not going to live my life in fear sitting waiting for that to happen.

Wade
01-30-2013, 07:35 AM
Classy!!!

By your standards I am a "liar and delusional"
I would suggest not illegally entering my home!

I do NOT have a handgun at the ready!!!!

12 guage regards..............

For what it's worth, I find it interesting that I'm told to GFM or I'm called an idiot but that's seems to be Ok.

Where is the CLASSY comeback comment there Stan?

road kill
01-30-2013, 07:59 AM
For what it's worth, I find it interesting that I'm told to GFM or I'm called an idiot but that's seems to be Ok.

Where is the CLASSY comeback comment there Stan?

Everybody stop picking on Wade!!!:cool:


YOU post a thread starting with using the Lords name in vain, and another thread telling everyone that disagrees with you we are "liars or delusional" and don't understand why heat comes back at you??

Seriously??

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f114/maxicomm/Megazip/ROFLMAO.gif

Wade
01-30-2013, 08:00 AM
I'm a gun owner, I believe in gun ownership. I believe we should have the right to those things. However, as with a lot of other things in our lives here in the greatest country on earth, they come with some restrictions. Look around you, you have restrictions with most everything you do. Because of those restrictions we have a wonderful country full of opportunity and fruitful living.
Some how we must move forward with respectful, logical and hopefully compromise type thinking so that the us vs them way of thinking is pushed to the side. If the other side, whether that be me or someone else, has a differing opinion we can not be such haters.

As a very good friend of mine in the ROCK industry would say at the end of one of his concerts,

GOOD NIGHT, I LOVE YOU AAALLLLLLL

Brad Turner
01-30-2013, 08:03 AM
It is deplorable that a government would give F16's (and billions of dollars) to a terrorist organization, whose country is in the midst of a civil war, and at the same time restrict the 2nd Amendment rights of their own law abiding citizens.

Our government is capable of anything and if this doesn't cause fear, then we deserve what's coming.

Dustin D
01-30-2013, 08:06 AM
Dustin, my argument is about the big push on the assault rifles, bush masters, ar 15. If one is talking about these types of guns to defend ones self I don't see the logic in the argument.

I know, it's b/c you can't Wade!



I asked those questions to try to point out the fact the defending ones self in those areas of vulnerability one would more than likely not have one of those weapons available at the time of attack.

This does not matter. I'm not concerned with what the average idiot does or doesn’t do or is or isn't prepared for.



When one is a sleep, more times than not one would have a hand gun in close proximity.
When one is in his/her car one would most likely have a hand gun in the glove box.
When one is walking down the street one would most likely be carrying a hand gun.


Wade look at you statement! This is not Logical this is your personal philosophy on personal safety and what measures YOU think are acceptable.

Don't DENY me mine own b/c you don't have the knowledge or experience to understand my decisions on what is and is not the best firearm for specific situations.




To use the reasoning of defense for the purpose of owning the above mentioned weapon in my opinion is off the mark.

I agree. I think Personal Defense is the 2nd Tier of the argument.

The 1st Tier is the Tyranny Argument. As if History hasn't proven that over the last few hundred years over and over again. The worlds past history isn’t a Movie, IT'S REAL! When a Gov. takes away guns ONLY ONE THING HAS FOLLOWED TIME & TIME AGAIN! and it WAS NOT SAFETY!




As I mentioned, if I'm sitting at home waiting for them to come and I am prepared then yes, I would like more power. But I am not going to live my life in fear sitting waiting for that to happen.

Uh ok..... Again you're just referring your personally philosophy on safety against criminals. This isn't logic, it's your own opinion.

Wade you obviously have no clue on the many methods in which to secure your home while having various firearms at the ready. it has nothing to with living in fear but acknowledgement that there is Evil in the world.

However do you deny someone’s right to live in fear? What if they live in Detroit? Do they not have a reason to be prepared at a moment’s notice? Should they be denied the most effective weapons to do so with?

Your personal opinion is breaking down under the enormous weight of LOGIC Wade ;)


Tell me again how the 2nd Amendment was for Personal Defense......just wondering.....

http://i.imgur.com/8C7Rk.jpg



Yea looks like he was thinking about Personal Defense then huh?

yea right!................







/

road kill
01-30-2013, 08:12 AM
I'm a gun owner, I believe in gun ownership. I believe we should have the right to those things. However, as with a lot of other things in our lives here in the greatest country on earth, they come with some restrictions. Look around you, you have restrictions with most everything you do. Because of those restrictions we have a wonderful country full of opportunity and fruitful living.
Some how we must move forward with respectful, logical and hopefully compromise type thinking so that the us vs them way of thinking is pushed to the side. If the other side, whether that be me or someone else, has a differing opinion we can not be such haters.

As a very good friend of mine in the ROCK industry would say at the end of one of his concerts,

GOOD NIGHT, I LOVE YOU AAALLLLLLL
Unfortunately progressives idea of comprimise is that you get your way.

Dustin D
01-30-2013, 08:21 AM
I'm a gun owner,
I believe in gun ownership.
I believe we should have the right to those things.


You sure about all that? Sounds to me like that's only true if I own the guns you do and believe in the very specific uses of those guns as you do. I think there is a better argument for contradiction here than there was for your contradiction claim about the video.

Let's review.


By the way, I do own a few shotguns, just not an AR.


If your answer to any of the 3 is anything but a hand gun your either a liar or dillusional.!

If one is talking about these types of guns to defend ones self I don't see the logic in the argument.


But I am not going to live my life in fear sitting waiting for that to happen.

Dustin D
01-30-2013, 08:25 AM
I don't see background checks or limited capacity magazines as punishing or a restriction on law abiders.



However, I feel we should choke off the ability nuts and felons to obtain firearms without a background check.

Who do you think obeys laws?

Are you under the assumption that criminals will start obeying this Private Background Check idea?

Do you not think that ONLY Law Abiders will obey this law?

Thanks

MooseGooser
01-30-2013, 09:28 AM
Here are two works of art, that I think explain very clearly the second ammendment.





http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q211/Moosegooser/death-of-general-warren_zpsb948bac7.jpg


http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q211/Moosegooser/800px-Freedman_bureau_harpers_cartoon_zpsb4738fe0.jpg



In the first, it shows the good guys on the left. The armed militia (people)defending itself from a standing army of a government.


The second , I beleive is very interesting.

It shows a "special" Militia. Those militia members were called Klansmen. They are all armed... It aslo shows a group of Blacks on the right. They are armed also.

In between them is a constable of the law, trying to keep peace. Once he leaves,,the Blacks become vunerable to hate. Without weapons, guns ,(look closely) Bayonetts in theis case,, they would be most definiatly violated.

The second ammendment guarentees us ALLLLL to the right to keep and bear arms. Not just "special", "approved", or "typed".

Gooser

Socks
01-30-2013, 09:39 AM
Dustin, my argument is about the big push on the assault rifles, bush masters, ar 15. If one is talking about these types of guns to defend ones self I don't see the logic in the argument.
I asked those questions to try to point out the fact the defending ones self in those areas of vulnerability one would more than likely not have one of those weapons available at the time of attack.
When one is a sleep, more times than not one would have a hand gun in close proximity.
When one is in his/her car one would most likely have a hand gun in the glove box.
When one is walking down the street one would most likely be carrying a hand gun.

To use the reasoning of defense for the purpose of owning the above mentioned weapon in my opinion is off the mark.

As I mentioned, if I'm sitting at home waiting for them to come and I am prepared then yes, I would like more power. But I am not going to live my life in fear sitting waiting for that to happen.

Wade, I will try to be polite.

I don't own a pistol and not because I don't want one. I've just spent my money on traditional hunting guns. I've got an unloaded shotgun by my bed that has a tubular magazine. Have you ever tried loading a shotgun when you think crap is hitting the fan? I have and it sucks because when your hands are shaking and your fingers don't work right it's hard to load a 3" shell let alone more than just one. I've done this action so many times while hunting I can't count it and I've reloaded under the stress of trying to hit birds with no problem. BUT, when I thought someone was getting ready to break into my house with my then 1 year old I was crapping bricks. As it turned out the sherriff turned up and looked around and no one was there, but my BBQ grill was moved to the other side of the deck.

I'm an engineer and I'm trained to be logical. After that I thought things through. I made several tactical mistakes that night and one of them could have cost me my life and that of my kid if there had been an actual break in. One was I didn't listen to my dog who growled at something outside. He never growls or barks. Two, I cleared my house while I left my kid upstairs alone while he was alseep because my wife was out of town. I can't/won't keep a loaded gun around because I have a young child.

It's easier to load a clip than a shotgun magazine under stress and adreline(sp?). Firepower is a good thing. i.e. 8 rounds are better than 3 rounds and 30 rounds is better than 8. I found a shotgun that uses a clip, but it in my mind it has reliability problems. Then there's old myth that criminals will run at the sound of a shotgun being racked. Here's my logic. 1st, people are assuming that the bad guys will run and not immediately fire on the sound. 2nd, Why in the hell would I give away the tactical advantage of surprise and stealth in that situation?

This lead me to wanting a AR-15. I could put the gun up on wall pegs out of reach of my kid and lock up the clips in a small nightstand safe. If necessary (I hope not ever) I insert the clip and pull back the bolt and go. I've decided that I won't clear my house, I'll let the law do that. I've got a part of my house that has become the "kill zone" and you can assume what you want from that term, but let's just say that it'd be in the best interests of a bad guy not to be there. This gets back to more firepower. I want to be able to send as many bullets towards the bad guys as I can to stop the threat before it gets to my family. I'm also assuming there will be more than one bad guy. I would also like my wife to get a pistol for a last defense in the assumption I get taken out. I've talked to her and we've decided to get our CPL's.

Each person's situation is different so to tell someone that they don't need this or that is in my opinion egotistical or not understanding the someone's situation. Before I could buy a AR-15 the tragedy at Sandyhook happened and we're where we are at now. The above was/is my situation and I've decided what's the best recourse for me and my family. Some people keep loaded guns around, I don't. Some people want a pump shotgun for defense, I don't. Some people don't want a gun, I do and it seems the people that don't want a gun don't want me to have one either. So they want to take away my gun or at the minimum take away some of my options. All the above stays away from the fact that the anti gun people don't want any guns at all, but they will tell you that they don't want to take yours. My advice is to read what happened in the U.K. and Australia to see where they want to go and how they're going to try to do it. If you don't realize that or believe it, well....like I always say you can't make people make a good decision.

We also haven't even touched the topic of the second amendment.

MooseGooser
01-30-2013, 09:44 AM
And by the way... those muskets in the first photo, were the most advanced of the times..

Franco
01-30-2013, 10:52 AM
3 quick questions regarding the defense of one self.

1) What type of gun would one most likely have by his bed in case of a home intruder?

2) What type of gun would one most likely have in ones car in close proximity to defend ones self?

3) What type of gun would one have the ability to carry on ones self to fend off an attacker?

If your answer to any of the 3 is anything but a hand gun your either a liar or dillusional. To defend ones self with a Bush Master or any other "assault rifle" is truly a bogus argument in the way we go about our daily lives. Now, if you want to say that your sitting at the window waiting 24/7 for any intruder. well then I am in complete agreement with you. However if that is the case what type of life are you living? A life of fear!!

1 - 9mm in the bedstand but a 40 caliber AR style Colt less than 5 seconds a way. If I had my choice it would be the Colt as there is NOTHING better at stopping home intruder(s). Joe Biden might like a shotgun for this but I prefer the firepower and what the heck does Biden know anyway? Besides, shotguns create to much of a mess to clean up afterwards. I want to stop the intruder(s) while not destroying my home.

2 In the car, Walther .38.

3 Conceal Carry depends on what I am wearing. I carry either my Walther .38 or Walther .22 with hollow point LR's.

No one should have the right to dictate to others what weapons they prefer for defense of self or Liberty.

charly_t
01-30-2013, 11:12 AM
It is deplorable that a government would give F16's (and billions of dollars) to a terrorist organization, whose country is in the midst of a civil war, and at the same time restrict the 2nd Amendment rights of their own law abiding citizens.

Our government is capable of anything and if this doesn't cause fear, then we deserve what's coming.

Bingo !

There have been some really good posts on this thread.

dixidawg
01-30-2013, 11:18 AM
No one should have the right to dictate to others what weapons they prefer for defense of self or Liberty.


Truer words were never spoken.

RetrieverNation
01-30-2013, 01:44 PM
No one should have the right to dictate to others what weapons they prefer for defense of self or Liberty.


Truer words were never spoken.

Isn't the real fear here the fear of politicians? I cant stand the thought of these guys toying with any of our rights and I believe our founding fathers designed the second amendment to protect us from politicians!

“The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money,” the French philosopher and historian Alexis de Tocqueville once said.

RetrieverNation
01-30-2013, 02:04 PM
3 quick questions regarding the defense of one self.

1) What type of gun would one most likely have by his bed in case of a home intruder?

2) What type of gun would one most likely have in ones car in close proximity to defend ones self?

3) What type of gun would one have the ability to carry on ones self to fend off an attacker?

If your answer to any of the 3 is anything but a hand gun your either a liar or dillusional. To defend ones self with a Bush Master or any other "assault rifle" is truly a bogus argument in the way we go about our daily lives. Now, if you want to say that your sitting at the window waiting 24/7 for any intruder. well then I am in complete agreement with you. However if that is the case what type of life are you living? A life of fear!!

This question is way to subjective but I can honestly say, I would bring what I believed to be superior firepower for the occasion. No sense in making it a fair fight for the criminal as they do not fight fair. Will they have body armor? Will there be multiple perps? Will I be defending only myself or my family as well? Give me a compact semi-auto rifle and more bullets that I need and my chances of keeping an assailant under duress will most likely be achieved. You surely dont want to give them a chance to fire back once you are provoked! This is probably the same reason cops use more than just hand guns when they feel the situation warrants it. Why pigeon hole yourself when the intruder could care less. Maybe a handgun makes you feel safe, but when it becomes time for kill or be killed, are you really ready for that? By your posts, I dont think so, so maybe your argument should be on how you can dial 911 in all the scenarios you mention. And if that doesn't set off a light bulb, maybe you could pretend you are a single mother who has just had multiple intruders enter her home.

dixidawg
01-30-2013, 02:15 PM
Isn't the real fear here the fear of politicians? I cant stand the thought of these guys toying with any of our rights and I believe our founding fathers designed the second amendment to protect us from politicians!

“The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money,” the French philosopher and historian Alexis de Tocqueville once said.


The danger is the politicians become emboldened when they know people have an attitude that it's OK to restrict what guns are available.

road kill
01-30-2013, 03:33 PM
This question is way to subjective but I can honestly say, I would bring what I believed to be superior firepower for the occasion. No sense in making it a fair fight for the criminal as they do not fight fair. Will they have body armor? Will there be multiple perps? Will I be defending only myself or my family as well? Give me a compact semi-auto rifle and more bullets that I need and my chances of keeping an assailant under duress will most likely be achieved. You surely dont want to give them a chance to fire back once you are provoked! This is probably the same reason cops use more than just hand guns when they feel the situation warrants it. Why pigeon hole yourself when the intruder could care less. Maybe a handgun makes you feel safe, but when it becomes time for kill or be killed, are you really ready for that? By your posts, I dont think so, so maybe your argument should be on how you can dial 911 in all the scenarios you mention. And if that doesn't set off a light bulb, maybe you could pretend you are a single mother who has just had multiple intruders enter her home.

Reminds me of the scene in "The Untouchables!"


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_d5jXDvrOu4&playnext=1&list=PLEFF0B519212BF1EE&feature=results_video

Sums the whole mess up nicely.

zeus3925
01-30-2013, 05:24 PM
Who do you think obeys laws?

Are you under the assumption that criminals will start obeying this Private Background Check idea?

Do you not think that ONLY Law Abiders will obey this law?

Thanks
It is not a matter of making outlaws obey the laws. It is a matter of doing as much as can be done to keep firearms out of the hands of the felons and nuts. It also gives a gun seller another tool to know who may be a threat to public safety, A purchasers who is not a felon or a mental health risk should have nothing to fear from a background check.

Gerry Clinchy
01-30-2013, 08:50 PM
It is not a matter of making outlaws obey the laws. It is a matter of doing as much as can be done to keep firearms out of the hands of the felons and nuts. It also gives a gun seller another tool to know who may be a threat to public safety, A purchasers who is not a felon or a mental health risk should have nothing to fear from a background check.

Have I missed something? I don't think anyone objects to the background checks.

jeff evans
01-30-2013, 08:54 PM
3 quick questions regarding the defense of one self.

1) What type of gun would one most likely have by his bed in case of a home intruder?

2) What type of gun would one most likely have in ones car in close proximity to defend ones self?

3) What type of gun would one have the ability to carry on ones self to fend off an attacker?

If your answer to any of the 3 is anything but a hand gun your either a liar or dillusional. To defend ones self with a Bush Master or any other "assault rifle" is truly a bogus argument in the way we go about our daily lives. Now, if you want to say that your sitting at the window waiting 24/7 for any intruder. well then I am in complete agreement with you. However if that is the case what type of life are you living? A life of fear!!

You may not be aware but our lives changed on new years eve when no one was looking. The president signed into law the "national defense authorization act," which allows the government to DETAIN AMERICAN CITIZENS INDEFINITELY WITHOUT FORMAL CHARGES OR A TRIAL (we used to have a constitutional right to habeas corpus as citizens) the law also has provisions for THE US GOVERNMENT TO KILL AMERICAN CITIZENS EVEN ON AMERICAN SOIL if the government feels you are a threat. This president has no regard for our constitution and is systematically destroying it. Can you see the writing on the wall? Before complete gun control can happen the government needed the NDAA enacted, you are aware that Hillary clinton was supposed to sign a sweeping gun ban with the united nations this summer but at the last minute decided to wait, wonder why? So any person or groups who protests when our 2nd Ammendment rights are taken will be deemed a threat and will be detained without formal charges or a trial, or killed per the NDAA.

So when someone asks "why one needs a high capacity rifle," thats why! If I hear one more politician purposefully mislead the public and prey on the constitutionally misinformed by asking "why does someone need an assault weapon to hunt with?" I'm going to climb thought the tv, push them off their chair and finish the interview for them:) oops then I would fall victim to the NDAA:(

sick lids
01-30-2013, 09:21 PM
who cares what treaties we sign

Ask an old Indian all about them.

zeus3925
01-30-2013, 09:42 PM
You may not be aware but our lives changed on new years eve when no one was looking. The president signed into law the "national defense authorization act," which allows the government to DETAIN AMERICAN CITIZENS INDEFINITELY WITHOUT FORMAL CHARGES OR A TRIAL (we used to have a constitutional right to habeas corpus as citizens) the law also has provisions for THE US GOVERNMENT TO KILL AMERICAN CITIZENS EVEN ON AMERICAN SOIL if the government feels you are a threat. This president has no regard for our constitution and is systematically destroying it. Can you see the writing on the wall? Before complete gun control can happen the government needed the NDAA enacted, you are aware that Hillary clinton was supposed to sign a sweeping gun ban with the united nations this summer but at the last minute decided to wait, wonder why? So any person or groups who protests when our 2nd Ammendment rights are taken will be deemed a threat and will be detained without formal charges or a trial, or killed per the NDAA.

So when someone asks "why one needs a high capacity rifle," thats why! If I hear one more politician purposefully mislead the public and prey on the constitutionally misinformed by asking "why does someone need an assault weapon to hunt with?" I'm going to climb thought the tv, push them off their chair and finish the interview for them:) oops then I would fall victim to the NDAA:(

I don't know where you got your info. The NDAA deals with the yearly funding of the military not the persecution of the citizenry. Don't take my word for it. The text is on the net.

jeff evans
01-30-2013, 09:50 PM
Here's a start....http://rt.com/usa/news/ndaa-injunction-tangerine-detention-376/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/21/ndaa-indefinite-detention-bill-rand-paul_n_2347774.html

Let me know if I missed something, although the bill does have a lot of defense spending related jargon intertwined.

charly_t
01-31-2013, 12:02 AM
I remember when Oklahoma was a dry state.........NOT.............boot-leggers did a very good business. It will be the same with guns if gun control laws get too restrictive. Heck we can't stop a lot of the "over the border" business now. Guns and ammo will get expensive but for the right price they will still be available. Talk about over crowded courts.

Pete
01-31-2013, 06:19 AM
The Second Amendment has been ruled to specifically extend to firearms “in common use” by the military by the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in U.S. v Miller (1939). In Printz v U.S. (1997) Justice Thomas wrote: “In Miller we determined that the Second Amendment did not guarantee a citizen’s right to possess a sawed-off shot gun because that weapon had not been shown to be “ordinary military equipment” that could “could contribute to the common defense”.



Pete

Pete
01-31-2013, 06:34 AM
On September 13, 1994, the Federal Assault Weapons Ban went into effect. A Washington Post editorial published two days later was candid about the ban’s real purpose:“[N]o one should have any illusions about what was accomplished [by the ban]. Assault weapons play a part in only a small percentage of crime. The provision is mainly symbolic; its virtue will be if it turns out to be, as hoped, a stepping stone to broader gun control.”In a challenge to the authority of the Federal government to require State and Local Law Enforcement to enforce Federal Law (Printz v United States) the U.S. Supreme Court rendered a decision in 1997. For the majority opinion Justice Scalia wrote: “…. this Court never has sanctioned explicitly a federal command to the States to promulgate and enforce laws and regulations When we were at last confronted squarely with a federal statute that unambiguously required the States to enact or administer a federal regulatory program, our decision should have come as no surprise….. It is an essential attribute of the States’ retained sovereignty that they remain independent and autonomous within their proper sphere of authority.”So why should non-gun owners, a majority of Americans, care about maintaining the 2nd Amendment right for citizens to bear arms of any kind?The answer is “The Battle of Athens, TN”. The Cantrell family had controlled the economy and politics of McMinn County, Tennessee since the 1930s. Paul Cantrell had been Sheriff from 1936 -1940 and in 1942 was elected to the State Senate. His chief deputy, Paul Mansfield, was subsequently elected to two terms as Sheriff. In 1946 returning WWII veterans put up a popular candidate for Sheriff. On August 1 Sheriff Mansfield and 200 “deputies” stormed the post office polling place to take control of the ballot boxes wounding an objecting observer in the process. The veterans bearing military style weapons, laid siege to the Sheriff’s office demanding return of the ballot boxes for public counting of the votes as prescribed in Tennessee law. After exchange of gun fire and blowing open the locked doors, the veterans secured the ballot boxes thereby protecting the integrity of the election. And this is precisely why all Americans should be concerned about protecting all of our right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment!Throughout history, disarming the populace has always preceded tyrants’ accession of power. Hitler, Stalin, and Mao all disarmed their citizens prior to installing their murderous regimes. At the beginning of our own nation’s revolution, one of the first moves made by the British government was an attempt to disarm our citizens. When our Founding Fathers ensured that the 2nd Amendment was made a part of our Constitution, they were not just wasting ink. They were acting to ensure our present security was never forcibly endangered by tyrants, foreign or domestic.

Brandoned
01-31-2013, 07:45 AM
Tell me what purpose an assault rifle has in the hands of Joe American?

Wade, I am just now reading through all 15 pages of this thread, but I will answer this question. If you ever come to the south and have any dealings with hogs or coyotes, trust me you will find a need for an AR style rifle! Also there are many 3 gun Competitions (Rifle/Pistol/Shotgun) that those are the only rifle you will shoot and be competitive with. Plus the bottom line is, they are very fun to shoot! I myself do not own one, but wish I did! Keep in mind, everyday millions of AR style rifles do not kill anyone. If WE give into a AR (I do not call them assault rifles like the lib media does), what is next? They are going after ALL guns and are not going to stop until they get them all. Look at NY for example, they already had a High Cap Mag limit which was 10, that wasn't enough, now it is 7! They are not going to stop until that number is zero!!!

So keep in mind when you say you are for them eliminating AR's, your semi auto shotgun's are the next thing they will be going for....

Oh btw Wade I am not trying to pick on you, but there is not a such thing as a Keckler and Koch shotgun, it is Heckler and Koch, just sayin :)

Gerry Clinchy
01-31-2013, 10:51 AM
http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/watchdogreports/atfs-milwaukee-sting-operation-marred-by-mistakes-failures-mu8akpj-188952581.html?abc=Ct5vpWpS

And will we be depending on ATF to enforce all these gun control measures? Here is another story of an ATF screw-up.

In fairness, this ATF program started in 2004 ... so then one has to ask why the new administration never cleaned it up? If none of this ATF stuff gets to Holder's desk, one has to question the quality of his staff.

FOM
01-31-2013, 11:52 AM
Wade,

I don't own an AR15 or Bushmaster, just because I prefer different firearms. I have a wide range to choose from, mostly because I enjoy what each one offers - I love to go shoot paper targets and such, I enjoy hunting, I enjoy being proficient with my firearms. The term "assault rifle" is inaccurate and is used to stir the emotions of an uneducated public, it's a political ploy to attempt to infringe on our 2nd amendment rights. And to think giving up any firearm because it isn't "useful" as a defensive weapon is not very logical, because the defensive use of the AR15 would come into play when you need to be just as well armed as the "enemy" - don't think defensive postures are only in the close quarters like a house or car or a mugging. Giving up a firearm is just like Censorship - can you imagine if now everything you said, wrote, read, heard was censored? If we can't infringe on the 1st amendment, why would we think we can infringe on the 2nd? And if you think the government is beyond abusing their power then you never had family loose everything during WWII just because they happen to be Japanese (and that is very recent history)? Feel free to give up YOUR firearms because once they take one type of firearm they will come after others....this isn't about self defense, hunting or sporting, it's about the Constitution and what separates this country from so many. Here is a blog from a friend I went to college with: http://stevehyde.wordpress.com/2013/01/17/world-without-guns/ he gives a great perspective on gun control, yes where he lives the gun control is very strict, but if we aren't careful we could end up like this in many places across this country.

Lainee

sick lids
01-31-2013, 11:54 PM
The funny thing about those missing m-4s in Milwaukee is that it is surely not in the hands of a law abiding citizen.Not to mention, if it had been a privately owned, full auto stolen the owner probably would have been jailed!

When the ATF have them they are called personal defense weapons...ironic?

tuckerdutch
02-01-2013, 12:21 AM
Isn't there a law that prohibits people from owning a destructive device like a 50 caliber rifle, machine gun, or a canon?

HPL
02-01-2013, 12:43 AM
I don't know about canons, but it is a misconception that private citizens can't own full autos. I believe that there is a bit of a licensing process and some fees, but I'm pretty sure that it is possible to legally own machine guns.

Socks
02-01-2013, 09:00 AM
Isn't there a law that prohibits people from owning a destructive device like a 50 caliber rifle, machine gun, or a canon?

Seriously!? Wow since I own a .50 caliber muzzle loader it must be a really destructive weapon right? Also, even if you gave me a .50 cal sniper rifle I know someone that could outshoot me with a open sight .308 caliber. It's the indian and not the bow. Also, with the proper licensing(sp?) you can own a "machine gun". As for the canon? I guess all those school mascots better turn those in including the military academies. Don't fall for the political ploys.

Dustin D
02-01-2013, 09:08 AM
Isn't there a law that prohibits people from owning a destructive device like a 50 caliber rifle, machine gun, or a canon?

Well considering you don't live in the United States, Yes there is a CA Law that has banned .50 BMG Rifles.

Dustin D
02-01-2013, 09:12 AM
I don't know about canons, but it is a misconception that private citizens can't own full autos. I believe that there is a bit of a licensing process and some fees, but I'm pretty sure that it is possible to legally own machine guns.

Correct and the same with Sound Suppressors. In fact here in Louisiana we just passed a law 2 years ago allowing for the Hunting of Outlaw Quadrupeds at Night & with Suppressors.

Here's a better visual for Machinegun Rights Per state etc. Roll Over each state to see more detail.
http://my.opencarry.org/?page_id=154

and YES they are hard to get, very rare, MUST be Registered, very expensive and the paperwork is an 8 months deal

HPL
02-01-2013, 10:15 AM
Correct and the same with Sound Suppressors. In fact here in Louisiana we just passed a law 2 years ago allowing for the Hunting of Outlaw Quadrupeds at Night & with Suppressors.

Here's a better visual for Machinegun Rights Per state etc. Roll Over each state to see more detail.
http://my.opencarry.org/?page_id=154

and YES they are hard to get, very rare, MUST be Registered, very expensive and the paperwork is an 8 months deal

Ah, that map indicates that since I live in Texas, as soon as I win the lottery, I'll be able to obtain my Ma Deuce to protect my compound ;-)

Franco
02-01-2013, 12:28 PM
Isn't there a law that prohibits people from owning a destructive device like a 50 caliber rifle, machine gun, or a canon?

Here is a Ladies 50cal. model in centerfire. The shoulder pad is in pink.

http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/c0.144.851.315/p851x315/287697_439870642711367_29896060_o.jpg

Dustin D
02-01-2013, 01:08 PM
Ah, that map indicates that since I live in Texas, as soon as I will the lottery, I'll be able to obtain my Ma Deuce to protect my compound ;-)


Seen one the other day with Tri-pod & T&E going for 29k.

HPL
02-01-2013, 02:32 PM
Seen one the other day with Tri-pod & T&E going for 29k.

Like I said, as soon as I win the lottery.

Mark Teahan
02-01-2013, 06:25 PM
My wife really likes our barrett 50 cal.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v631/splattermatic/c56980d7.jpg

HPL
02-01-2013, 07:28 PM
Here is a Ladies 50cal. model in centerfire. The shoulder pad is in pink.

http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/c0.144.851.315/p851x315/287697_439870642711367_29896060_o.jpg

You think she's REALLY going to shoot that without ear protection? Crazy!!! She'll be making everyone write in all caps before before she's 30.

pstrombeck
02-01-2013, 08:15 PM
If I read your post right you indicated you purchased a .22 revolver in lieu of a blank pistol. You may want to check your local laws regarding it's use. Whereas a blank pistol is a cap gun / noise maker (note most manufacturers do not even drill out the barrel anymore) you now are carrying a firearm and are subject to all laws regading firearms. Put it in your pocket and it is now illegally concealed without proper permit. Discharge it within city or village limits and you have problems. I used to belong to training group that trained on property that was inside the corporate limits of a township. When the police responded to a shooting / noise complaint they wanted to see all the 'firearms'. If any club member would have produced a .22 revolver they would have been cited for discharging a firearm in city limits and possibly illegal concelment of the weapon. Be careful and do not leave it - or your blank pistol for that matter in plain viewwhile in your vehicle you'll end up on the pavement with a cops knee on the back of your neck.

RadarsDad
02-01-2013, 09:04 PM
In the two weeks after the Newtown shooting enough guns were sold to equip the Chinese and Indian Armies!

Gerry Clinchy
02-02-2013, 08:20 PM
http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40772
This site quotes the 3-page letter to Obama, signed by 1100 Green Berets, expressing their views on additional gun control measures.

I wonder if these men would have "passed the "litmus test" mentioned in another thread. Somehow I think not.

Gerry Clinchy
02-03-2013, 10:58 AM
The Newtown school district decided on their best solution:

Late Thursday the Newtown Board of Education voted to request the presence of two kinds of guards inside the town’s elementary schools. The vote, for now, only represents a request — it still needs to clear budget and logistical boundaries since the guards would come from the town's police resources as opposed to the school board itself. But the plan “would put two eyes and ears — one armed, one unarmed — at each Newtown school,”reports Bronxville Patch's Davis Dunavin. (http://bronxville.patch.com/articles/newtown-security-vision-discussion) The guards, officially called school resource officers (SROs), were already a fixture at all Newtown schools in the wake of the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary, but until this vote they were budgeted only to be a presence at middle and high Schools. . . .
Pragmatism wins out over wishful thinking?