|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826 |
Nice post. I won't quote the whole thing.
However, I do disagree with banning assault rifles. Why? First off, if you ban them, the law abiding citizens will get rid of them, the law breakers won't.
Secondly, what is "assault" rifle? Now, obviously, an automatic rifle (some call them machine guns) - hold the trigger, empty the clip, type of weapons - yeah, ban them. Oh, they already are banned, that's right.
What defines "assault" weapon. Is it the ammo used? Is it magazine capacity? Is it the look of the gun?
Ban full auto - and it is banned.
Ban a a 10 round sks? Why? I have hand guns that hold more than 10 rounds.......is it because an sks, or an AK47 shoots 7.62X39 rounds? What is being banned?
I mean, I know people with semi auto .308's - should they be banned?
You see where I'm going............
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,349
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,349 |
Quote:
And no one gets shot on our road......imagine that...competent gun owners.
Then you are just not trying hard enough!! 
KING
You may be in the drivers seat but God is holding the map. #GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,718
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,718 |
Quote:
However, I do disagree with banning assault rifles. Why? First off, if you ban them, the law abiding citizens will get rid of them, the law breakers won't.
Sounds like an NRA commercial....and true for awhile but in time they could/would be eliminated. Again, there is no reason for a citizen to own one, whether it be a law-abiding person or otherwise.
Quote:
Secondly, what is "assault" rifle? Now, obviously, an automatic rifle (some call them machine guns) - hold the trigger, empty the clip, type of weapons - yeah, ban them. Oh, they already are banned, that's right.
No, that actually isn't true. The ban was a 10 year ban enacted in 1994 that expired 5 years ago. They are trying to muster support to re-institute the ban. Here's one article of millions since you must have missed this when it happened:
web page
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 750
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 750 |
The funny thing about the previous "ban", is that is wasn't a real ban. What it did was ban having certain features at the same time. So, manufactures still made the same gun, only delete certain features. I could still buy a semi-automatic rifle that held 30 rounds at a time, but couldn't have a flash suppressor on it. Some ban huh? Also, all the guns that had the banned features that were already on shelves, stayed there until bought. Maybe I should get a tin hat, but it looks like this law was to see how far government could go without people making to much noise. Let them get used to it and later push some more. Although they didn't get very far, because in the next election lots of people that voted for this law lost their job. Here's an answers link that describes the "ban". http://www.answers.com/topic/violent-crime-control-and-law-enforcement-act
Go Irish!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,718
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,718 |
Thanks....here's a quote from that link that illustrates the point: Quote:
The provisions banning assault weapons had some impact but also proved fairly easy for gun manufacturers to evade. In the year 2002 for example, the person charged as the Washington D.C. area sniper, John Allen Muhammad, allegedly used an assault weapon the manufacturer had modified by removing two military-type components, thus escaping the ban.
In addition, I can take a semi-auto AR15 and with some small modifications make it into a fully automatic rifle. There is no reason for a citizen to own such a weapon. None.
Where'd ya go Arch?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826 |
Quote:
Where'd ya go Arch?
No where.
I'm still reading those millions of articles.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458 |
Quote:
There is no reason for a citizen to own such a weapon.
Plenty of people in my family, and friends of the family own AR's. They are used mainly for recreational shooting, cuz they are great guns to shoot. They are for shooting competitively, and also can be used for varmint hunting----namely groundhogs. Apparently you think that since you don't own or use these tools, then no one should be able too.
I don't think that banning the sale of these guns is reasonable. I don't understand why other people feel the need to take away the rights of others due to their own personal ideologies.
IMO, gun control is just another way that the government attampts to control the population----and a lot of the sheep seem to think its a good idea. Pretty soon, America will have given away everything they fought for when we gained independence.
I wish to wash my Irish wristwatch......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,718
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,718 |
Allow me to make a stereotype....since you are addicted to illegal drugs, you think everyone should do illegal drugs.
Assault rifles are made to rapidly kill human beings. You can use other weapons that are more than adequate for recreational shooting.
Feel free to post some more on this topic if and when you are sober, I will shoot any argument that you could possibly make full of holes.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,718
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,718 |
Let me also add that you can't post on this subject in an intelligent manner. All you ever do is post outlandish things in order to get a rise out of people. There is no possible way that you can actually think as you state you do and function as a living and breathing human being. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458 |
Quote:
Let me also add that you can't post on this subject in an intelligent manner. All you ever do is post outlandish things in order to get a rise out of people. There is no possible way that you can actually think as you state you do and function as a living and breathing human being.
Do you feel better about yourself now.......
But anyway...
How about you go up to Camp Perry sometime and talk to the people who spend lots of money to put together their AR's with spec's for competitive shooting. Tell them their guns are only for killing human beings. And they will laugh at you....
AR's are great for recreational shooting, as well as killing groundhogs, coyotes, etc.
Saying they are only for killing human beings shows how your mind really works.
And furthermore, bringing up my thoughts on drug decriminalization and recreational use is completely unrelated to this thread.
Again, spend some time at Camp Perry with the high-power crowd and you would probably change your tone. I know plenty of people that belong to shooting teams and have a healthy appreciation for shooting high-power rifles, and they are all good people.
Its sad when someone on a messageboard has some misguided views and tries to make things into something they aren't.
I wish to wash my Irish wristwatch......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,803
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,803 |
Shep I gotta say I loved shooting my sister's ex's AK 47. It was a semi auto (very easy to upgrade to full auto) and I should add he has all the proper paperwork to own it as well as his other guns (which include a M 16 with a folding mini stock...Very cool). It has a very different weight to it then the M 16 and that makes it fun to shoot. Now we only shot it in a properly set up area shooting at targets. He isn't one to hunt with things like the AK. He is simply a collector that enjoys different types of guns.
Other then people like him I see no use for these type of guns. IMO the should be highly regulated. They are very dangerous (more so then guns that can't be made auto or have large capacity clips) to be allowed to circulate easily.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,803
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,803 |
You gotta be kidding me if you really think the vast majority of us on here that have been around since you showed up don't think you make comments that are completely meant for shock value. You have tamed your act quite a bit in recent months and have actually had intelligent conversations ( I believe you are indeed very intelligent) but go back and search some of your comments. Pretty far out there.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,718
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,718 |
Quote:
Shep I gotta say I loved shooting my sister's ex's AK 47. It was a semi auto (very easy to upgrade to full auto)
Very easy to upgrade to full auto.....and again, this weapon is designed for one purpose and one purpose only. I've shot them as well....very simple weapon for disassembly and operationally.
Quote:
and I should add he has all the proper paperwork to own it as well as his other guns (which include a M 16 with a folding mini stock...Very cool). It has a very different weight to it then the M 16 and that makes it fun to shoot.
Yep, I've fired this weapon as well.
Quote:
Now we only shot it in a properly set up area shooting at targets. He isn't one to hunt with things like the AK. He is simply a collector that enjoys different types of guns.
If that were the case with all of these weapons, then it wouldn't be an issue, but as we know it isn't the case.....too many times, we have guys like this-----
ThePittsburghChannel.com
PITTSBURGH POLICE OFFICERS KILLED
Who Is Richard Poplawski?
Friends, Family Talk About Pittsburgh Suspect In Police Officers' Triple-Killing
POSTED: 6:17 pm EDT April 4, 2009
UPDATED: 9:53 pm EDT April 6, 2009
PITTSBURGH -- The man accused of fatally shooting three Pittsburgh police officers and injuring two others was alternately described by friends as "an easygoing, fun-loving guy" and a known gun enthusiast who was prepared to die after he woke up on a bright spring Saturday morning.
Poplawski
Richard Poplawski photo from Pittsburgh police.
Richard "Pop" Poplawski was moved Sunday night around 10:30 p.m. from UPMC Presbyterian to the Allegheny County Jail, where he will remain held without bond pending a preliminary hearing.
Between volleys of gunfire at his Stanton Heights home, Poplawski, 22, was apparently calling friends and family.
"He just told my nephew, Billy, that he was shot twice -- one in the arm, once in the leg," aunt Marianne Klimczyk told WTAE Channel 4's Bob Mayo. "He just told him to tell everybody that 'I love them' because he didn't think that he was going to get out of there alive."
Childhood friend Edward Perkovic said he spoke to Poplawski via telephone at about 8:30 a.m.
"What he said to me today was, 'Eddie, I'm going to die today. Tell your family I love them and I love you.' And I heard gunshots and he hung up the phone," Perkovic said. "This was a complete surprise to me and my family and everyone's families that were friends with him. Nobody ever expected something like this from him."
Perkovic said Poplawski feared "the Obama gun ban that's on the way" and "didn't like our rights being infringed upon."
"He wasn't involved in any gangs, any militias. He believed in his right to bear arms. He believed that hard economic times were going to put forward gun bans," Perkovic said.
Suspect Owned Several Guns, Supply Of Ammunition
Pittsburgh Police Chief Nate Harper said Poplawski was armed with a high-powered assault rifle and a pistol, and he had a significant amount of ammunition as he allegedly fired out of his bedroom window on Fairfield Street.
kelly-sciullo-mayhle
Timeline according to police statements:
* Shortly after 7 a.m. - Two officers respond to Stanton Heights domestic call.
* Sciullo enters house; is shot and killed.
* Mayhle backs him up; is shot and killed.
* On way home, Kelly decides to help; is shot and killed.
* McManaway shot in hand trying to help Kelly.
* Jones tries to secure back of house, jumps fence, breaks leg.
* SWAT arrives, comes under fire.
* Poplawski continues firing out of bedroom window.
* Negotiators convince Poplawski to surrender.
* Poplawski taken into custody; charged with criminal homicide, aggravated assault.
According to the police criminal complaint obtained by WTAE Channel 4 Action News on Sunday, Poplawski's mother said her son has been "stockpiling guns and ammunition, buying and selling the weapons online because he believed that as a result of economic collapse, the police were no longer able to protect society."
Poplawski's mother said her son enlisted with the U.S. Marine Corps a few years ago but was discharged for assaulting a drill sergeant in basic training. Since his discharge, Poplawski's mother said her son had been stockpiling weapons, according to the criminal complaint.
"He wasn't fully a Marine. He got a dishonorable discharge out of boot camp," Perkovic said. "He wanted to get out of the Marine Corps."
Poplawski's mother also said her son has been "stockpiling guns and ammunition, buying and selling the weapons online because he believed that as a result of economic collapse, the police were no longer able to protect society."
According to the criminal complaint, Poplawski's mother said her son "only liked police when they were not curtailing his constitutional rights, which he was determined to protect."
"He has a few weapons. I know he has a machine gun, I know he has a couple rifles and I know he has a couple handguns…They're recreational, and for deer hunting and for everything. I mean, he's not a bad kid," Klimczyk said.
A posting on what was believed to be Poplawski's MySpace Web page said, "I spread my secrets out. Everybody knows something, but nobody knows everything. Some could call me crazy. My answer would be that at least I insist to exist."
The page, which was removed by MySpace in the afternoon, included a photo of Poplawski and a description in which he called himself reasonably intelligent and well-spoken, with a wild life ahead, saying that the world is his oyster.
Team 4 Uncovers Documents Illustrating Poplawski's Past
WTAE Channel 4 found court documents indicating a protection from abuse order and disorderly conduct, but no major criminal violations in Poplawski's history.
"He was just an easygoing, fun-loving guy, telling jokes," Jeff Loffler said. "Everybody knew him. He was just the kind of guy who you could have a conversation with even if you didn't know him."
One neighbor, who did not want to be identified, said, "He personally threatened my stepdaughter, and chased her through the neighborhood."
“This kid's nothing but trouble,” the neighbor said.
Poplawski is charged with three counts of criminal homicide -- relating to the shootings of officers Eric Kelly, Paul Sciullo II and Stephen Mayhle -- and a count of aggravated assault against Officer Timothy McManaway, who suffered a hand wound.
"I apologize to the families and the police officers that are there to serve and protect us, that they lost their lives, but I don't want the stories about my nephew to be told the wrong way," Klimczyk said.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826 |
So, you want "assault" weapons banned. No reason for them, other than rapidly killing humans. Okay.
What about semi auto handguns. Or semi auto shotguns? Any shooter worth his tar can reload either of those quick enough to kill many people in short time. Ever seen a good revolver reloader? They can rattle off 6 shots pretty quick, and fire off another 6 real quick. And repeat, over and over.
Granted, a 7.62 X 39 is a more dangerous round - but when you get down to ballistics, a 9, or a .45, or ,.40....they are just as deadly, and can be fired just as rapidly as an "legal" assault" rifle.
How about a 12 guage shot gun? More deadly than an SKS, or an AK - and no, a 12 gauge won't penetrate a cement wall as well....but still, put a slug in a 12 guage, or 5, and it will put a larger hole in a person. Do we ban them?
Where do we stop banning? At b.b. gun?
Full auto guns ARE banned. Yet they are still out there, in extremely small numbers, mainly held by drug dealers.
Killing people is already "banned", yet it still happens. Daily.
Shooting a gun, even a single shot .22, at a person is illegal, unless the person shot at is attempting to harm you.
Crooks are crooks. Criminals are criminals. Crooks steat despite the law banning "crooking". Criminals will shoot despite the laws saying you can't.
Bad guys will always have bad weapons, despite any "ban" on them.
As soon as assault weapons are banned (automatic) the bad guys will have them while law abiding citizens won't.
Then what?
As far as I'm concerned, ban them all - any assault rifle - whether it's easy to turn it into a full auto or not.
But someone better make damn sure every "assault" weapon in this country is taken care of before they come and get mine.
Or my semi auto hand gun. Or my semi auto shotgun. Or my semi auto .22.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 509
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 509 |
Well if someone came to rob me, I never use a gun nor will at all. But if I had to, I would shoot him in both ankles.
June Summertime Fun and Love
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,803
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,803 |
Quote:
Well if someone came to rob me, I never use a gun nor will at all. But if I had to, I would shoot him in both ankles.
Then you'd be a fool. That's not really an easy thing to do. There is a reason people are taught to shoot center mass.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,718
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,718 |
Quote:
So, you want "assault" weapons banned. No reason for them, other than rapidly killing humans. Okay.
That is correct. Please tell me what other purpose they have??
You ramble on about banning bb guns and 22s Mr NRA.....these weapons have intended purposes other than rapidly killing humans, see?
Quote:
Full auto guns ARE banned. Yet they are still out there, in extremely small numbers, mainly held by drug dealers.
How'd you arrive at that factoid???
Quote:
Killing people is already "banned", yet it still happens. Daily.
Shooting a gun, even a single shot .22, at a person is illegal, unless the person shot at is attempting to harm you.
Crooks are crooks. Criminals are criminals. Crooks steat despite the law banning "crooking". Criminals will shoot despite the laws saying you can't.
Straight out of one of your NRA sponsored magazines, right??
Quote:
But someone better make damn sure every "assault" weapon in this country is taken care of before they come and get mine.
Or my semi auto hand gun. Or my semi auto shotgun. Or my semi auto .22.
I know, I know....they can have your gun when they pry it from your cold dead fingers right??? 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826 |
Let me try this again. I guess, first let me ask exactly what it is about assault weapons that makes you feel they should be banned? (again, full auto is already banned). Is it the ability to shoot rapidly (as many as 30 shots - heck, probably more)? If so, someone with a 9 mm handgun can fire off rounds almost as fast. Should the semi auto handguns be banned? Is it the "power" of the weapon? I can see this, as the 7.62 is a pretty doggone powerful round. I agree, a person out legally hunting has no need for 30 rounds of 7.62 just to shoot a deer. (however, I think, THINK - it is illegal to have a clip like that loaded full for hunting purposes, although I don't know it for a fact.) Is it the "look" of the weapon that has you wanting assault rifles banned? Or the term? I don't believe for a second that what a gun is "called" is what affects your desire to have them banned. Contrary to your opinion that assault weapons only use is for killing people, many people enjoy sport shooting with them. Target practice, blasting things (not people, not animals), competition. There ARE other uses for those weapons, but yes, in the wrong hands, they can be dangerous. As can any gun, actually. If you want them banned because of the "power" of the 7.62 round, why not ban the round instead of "assault weapons"? There are many guns - rifles I should say - that shoot as powerful, if not more powerful rounds. An AR 15 shoots the .223 (or 5.56). Much less powerful. Should they be banned? There are many more examples of powerful guns, should they be banned? Oh, let me get this in as well, Mr. Anti NRA I don't have a problem with assault rifles being banned - but what is an assault rifle/weapon? That's where the misunderstanding is occurring I believe. What is the purpose of a handgun? One of purposes is to kill, as it is with any gun. There are other purposes as well, as I mentioned earlier. So, what is it about assault weapons, specifically, that makes you want them banned? Oh, by the way, no one will ever pry an assault weapon from my cold dead fingers because if the law says I can't have one, I'll give it up gladly, BEFORE I die.  Here's the thing - fully auto weapons are illegal. Period. (again, the caveat - unless you have a special license as a collector, etc, but neither you nor I would ever pass that requirement). We have so many gun laws on the books already, how many more do we need? Seeing as the people that shoot other people for "fun" are already breaking many many laws, would one more law stop them? Look at the recent shootings covered in the media - how many of them involved assault weapons? Not many. How many involved hand guns? Quite a few. Mass killing of people is wrong. Bad. Scary. Banning assault rifles - legal ones as of now - isn't going to stop any killing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,341
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,341 |
The black market is full of illegal guns. If someone wants one, he/she can get one.
But some laws in the U.S. make it a lot easier (not an expert, just know that from things I have read), which is how those two kids in Colorado got the weapons they used at Columbine.
I don't hang out with gangster types, but like many people, I could literally call a guy who could call another guy and get me almost any kind of gun I wanted, if I had the money. True stuff.
![[Linked Image from i28.photobucket.com]](http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c201/shadedog/mcenroe2.jpg) gmstrong -----------------
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826 |
Agreed. 100%. So, would another law prevent that? Or 10 more laws? No. Sad to say, but no.
As for the columbine shooters - each carried what was at one time a legal shotgun. (they only became illegal after they shortened the barrels). One had a TEC-DC9 - a 9 millimeter handgun, the other carried a Hi Point carbine - not sure but I think it was a 9 mm. (a carbine is an extremely long hand gun, OR, a short rifle).
Not one single assault rifle.
The guy from the Virginia Tech shootings........hand guns. No assault rifle.
The recent shooting of 2 cops in Florida - hand guns.
The shooting in Pittsburgh? I'm not sure what was used.
So, what would banning assault rifles do to prevent these shootings? Nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,341
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,341 |
Quick 'net search on how Columbine kids got their guns: Quote:
In the months prior to the attacks, Harris and Klebold acquired two 9 mm firearms and two 12-gauge shotguns. A rifle and the two shotguns were bought by a friend, Robyn Anderson, at the Tanner Gun Show in December, 1998. Harris and Klebold later bought a handgun from another friend, Mark Manes, for $500. Manes was jailed after the massacre for selling a handgun to a minor, as was Philip Duran, who had introduced the duo to Manes.
With instructions from the Internet, they also built 99 improvised explosive devices of various designs and sizes. They also sawed the barrels and butts off their shotguns in order to make them easier to conceal.
I don't think banning handguns prevents anyone from getting a firearm they want.
Last edited by lampdogg; 04/28/09 03:26 PM.
gmstrong -----------------
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,718
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,718 |
Quote:
Let me try this again.
I guess, first let me ask exactly what it is about assault weapons that makes you feel they should be banned? (again, full auto is already banned).
Is it the ability to shoot rapidly (as many as 30 shots - heck, probably more)?
And let me try again as well....there is NO NEED for a citizen to own an AR15 or an AK or an SKS or any such type of weapon that is capable of rapidly firing large caliber rounds that are DESIGNED to do one thing and one thing only....which is to kill human beings. That is their intended purpose. The intended purpose and to eliminate these weapons would eliminate the "competitions" that you speak of as well.
Not talking about a 9mm handgun that is made for self defense or your 870 for deer hunting I am talking about rifles that were INTENDED to kill human beings. Why try to twist things around as you are? It's quite simple and you trying to add things that have no bearing........
Quote:
Contrary to your opinion that assault weapons only use is for killing people, many people enjoy sport shooting with them. Target practice, blasting things (not people, not animals), competition.
Yep...."BLASTING THINGS" is such a compelling argument.....don't know what the hell I was thinking.
Quote:
There ARE other uses for those weapons, but yes, in the wrong hands, they can be dangerous. As can any gun, actually.
Yeah, I know that any gun can be dangerous....thanks for clarifying again. 
Do you think I'm some kind of moron or something???? I would lay MONEY that I've handled and fired a much more diverse selection of firearms than you have.
Yeeeehaw the Browns scored let me go shoot my gun!! Yeehaw!
Quote:
Oh, by the way, no one will ever pry an assault weapon from my cold dead fingers because if the law says I can't have one, I'll give it up gladly, BEFORE I die.
After "they" make damned sure they got everyone else's first, right?
Quote:
We have so many gun laws on the books already, how many more do we need? Seeing as the people that shoot other people for "fun" are already breaking many many laws, would one more law stop them?
Given time, yes it would. But that's logical and that has gone out the window already with you in this discussion.....your desire is to twist things around when my point is and was very simple.
Quote:
Mass killing of people is wrong. Bad. Scary. Banning assault rifles - legal ones as of now - isn't going to stop any killing.
Back to square one with your NRA brainwashing.....guns don't kill people, people kill people and if you get rid of some guns then only the criminals will have those guns, right?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 750
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 750 |
Quote:
I agree, a person out legally hunting has no need for 30 rounds of 7.62 just to shoot a deer. (however, I think, THINK - it is illegal to have a clip like that loaded full for hunting purposes, although I don't know it for a fact.)
Well, in Ohio you can't legally deer hunt with a rifle. Here in Ky where you can hunt with a rifle, the limit for rounds in a magazine is 10, with maybe one in the chamber. I know lots of people that bought "assualt rifles" when they were cheap to protect against coyotes. They look scary though, and were developed for armies to kill other armies, so we need to ban them for our own good. 
Go Irish!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,718
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,718 |
Quote:
I know lots of people that bought "assualt rifles" when they were cheap to protect against coyotes. They look scary though, and were developed for armies to kill other armies, so we need to ban them for our own good.
Do you need an assault rifle to take care of a coyote? No.
10 rounds in the magazine to deer hunt...... *LOL* yeah that is real necessary too. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458 |
I know a lot of folks who wouldn't just give up their AR.
They are great guns, fun to shoot, and very useful. Its totally ridiculous to ban them.
I wish to wash my Irish wristwatch......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 750
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 750 |
Quote:
Do you need an assault rifle to take care of a coyote? No.
Well since you say an assualt rifle isn't needed to protect against coyotes, you obviously have experience using something else. What have you found to dispatch coyotes better than a moderately powerful semi-automatic rifle? Thats right, MODERATELY powerful. The 7.62x39 and 5.56x39 cartridges that the AK47 and AR-15 fire aren't very powerful. The 30-06 that is the most popular hunting rifle sold in the US is far more powerful than either of those rounds. To illustrate how much more powerful, the 30-06 is 7.62x61 centimeters. The 7.62 is size of the bullet in millimeters, 61 length of case that the powder is in. That means it can hold about 1/3 more powder than the AK47 cartridge.
Quote:
10 rounds in the magazine to deer hunt...... *LOL* yeah that is real necessary too.
Did you ever consider that limit was set so someone could use the rifle they hunt with to protect themselves against coyotes? I've seen them in packs.
Go Irish!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,341
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,341 |
Quote:
Do you need an assault rifle to take care of a coyote? No.
10 rounds in the magazine to deer hunt...... *LOL* yeah that is real necessary too.
True enough, but although I've never owned a gun in my life and probably never will, I can understand a gun enthusiast enjoying shooting off an assault rifle, or just having one as part of a collection. Guns don't kill people, shep... bullets kill people. 
gmstrong -----------------
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826 |
Quote:
Quote:
Let me try this again.
I guess, first let me ask exactly what it is about assault weapons that makes you feel they should be banned? (again, full auto is already banned).
Is it the ability to shoot rapidly (as many as 30 shots - heck, probably more)?
And let me try again as well....there is NO NEED for a citizen to own an AR15 or an AK or an SKS or any such type of weapon that is capable of rapidly firing large caliber rounds that are DESIGNED to do one thing and one thing only....which is to kill human beings. That is their intended purpose. The intended purpose and to eliminate these weapons would eliminate the "competitions" that you speak of as well.
Not talking about a 9mm handgun that is made for self defense or your 870 for deer hunting I am talking about rifles that were INTENDED to kill human beings. Why try to twist things around as you are? It's quite simple and you trying to add things that have no bearing........
Well, that AR-15 that you speak of wanting to ban because it is so powerful.......it shoots a .223 round.
I don't believe a .223 is even allowable out west to hunt deer, as it's "not powerful" enough. You need a .243 or larger gun.
Kinda shoots your "too powerful" thinking all to hell.Quote:
Quote:
Contrary to your opinion that assault weapons only use is for killing people, many people enjoy sport shooting with them. Target practice, blasting things (not people, not animals), competition.
Yep...."BLASTING THINGS" is such a compelling argument.....don't know what the hell I was thinking.
I was honestly trying to have a serious discussion with you. Then you turn to replying like this?
Quote:
Quote:
There ARE other uses for those weapons, but yes, in the wrong hands, they can be dangerous. As can any gun, actually.
Yeah, I know that any gun can be dangerous....thanks for clarifying again.
I was honestly trying to have a serious discussion with you, and you attempt to be a smartass?Quote:
Do you think I'm some kind of moron or something???? I would lay MONEY that I've handled and fired a much more diverse selection of firearms than you have.
Could be. I'm not trying to get in a pissing match like it seems you are. You must be quite an accomplished shooter, congrats to you. You must have fired many weapons. Perhaps you served in the military. Or, perhaps you have NOT fired a "much more diverse selection of firearms" than I have. Quote:
Yeeeehaw the Browns scored let me go shoot my gun!! Yeehaw!
I was trying to have a serious discussion with you, and you bring this up? Grow up, dude. At least ACT like an adult. Unless you said that in a vain attempt to belittle me.......and if you did, which we all know you did, you failed miserably.
If you would care to discuss the topic at hand, let's do so.
Quote:
Quote:
Oh, by the way, no one will ever pry an assault weapon from my cold dead fingers because if the law says I can't have one, I'll give it up gladly, BEFORE I die.
After "they" make damned sure they got everyone else's first, right?
Again, I was attempting to have a serious discussion with you. It does appear that you are not capable of such, what with all the personal attacks and what not.
Quote:
Quote:
We have so many gun laws on the books already, how many more do we need? Seeing as the people that shoot other people for "fun" are already breaking many many laws, would one more law stop them?
Given time, yes it would. But that's logical and that has gone out the window already with you in this discussion.....your desire is to twist things around when my point is and was very simple.
I have not twisted anything. How much time is needed before the "you can't kill someone over nothing" law is followed? How much time is needed before people follow the law of the land? Just a bit more time, and a lot more laws?
Quote:
Quote:
Mass killing of people is wrong. Bad. Scary. Banning assault rifles - legal ones as of now - isn't going to stop any killing.
Back to square one with your NRA brainwashing.....guns don't kill people, people kill people and if you get rid of some guns then only the criminals will have those guns, right?
I love how you keep coming back to the NRA thing. But, since you bring it up, yeah, you're right...guns don't kill people, people do.
Look at Columbine. Only one of the 4 weapons used there could even remotely be considered an "assault" weapon, and it was a handgun. Seems to me your wanted ban on assault weapons would not have stopped that one, or the one in NYC recently, or the ex deputy in Florida that shot 2 cops, or the Virginia Tech shooting, etc etc etc.
You never really did answer my question though: what is it about assault weapons that makes you want them banned? The AR shoots a caliber that is not legal to hunt deer with in some places. The 7.62 is a powerful round, but less powerful than many hunting rifles. So, your "power" reason is poor.
Handguns can hold and shoot just as quick as assault weapons......so your "they shoot too many too quick" thinking doesn't hold water.
Can we have a discussion about this, where you actually lay out your thinking? The only thing you've said is "assault weapons are designed to kill people". What gun isn't capable of that?
You poopoo any thought that many people use rifles for target shooting, or for competition, or for fun.
Oh, I'd love to see proof of "all the weapons" you've shot as well. Proof, not just you saying so. While you are confident you've handled more weapons than I have, and shot more, etc....confident enough to lay money on it.....it would be interesting, to say the least.
Can we have a grown up discussion or not?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,341
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,341 |
Florida allowed people to carry a concealed weapon back I believe in the late 80s... and violent crime went down. Not saying the law was the only factor, but it MUST have played a role. People are less apt to mug someone or stick a knife in somebody's face if they think the other guy might be packing. Just sayin.'
England brought in strict gun laws around the same time... violent crime went UP. Maybe unrelated, maybe not.
gmstrong -----------------
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826 |
Quote:
Florida allowed people to carry a concealed weapon back I believe in the late 80s... and violent crime went down. Not saying the law was the only factor, but it MUST have played a role. People are less apt to mug someone or stick a knife in somebody's face if they think the other guy might be packing. Just sayin.'
England brought in strict gun laws around the same time... violent crime went UP. Maybe unrelated, maybe not.
It's not coincidence.
Now I'll wait for shep to lamely attempt to insinuate that I can't think for myself, that I only follow the NRA line of thinking.
I find it humorous when people attempt to do that as it only means they've "run out of ammunition" so to speak, so instead of discussing, they use labels. Wonder if I'll get banned for saying that? 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,341
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,341 |
The law-abiding, responsible gun owner is not to be feared; it's the violent criminal we need to worry about... and unfortunately they can get any kind of gun they want.
gmstrong -----------------
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826 |
Quote:
The law-abiding, responsible gun owner is not to be feared; it's the violent criminal we need to worry about... and unfortunately they can get any kind of gun they want.
100% agree.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 750
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 750 |
Go Irish!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Florida allowed people to carry a concealed weapon back I believe in the late 80s... and violent crime went down. Not saying the law was the only factor, but it MUST have played a role.
Crime skyrocketed there in the early 80's after releasing all of his criminals and mentally ill on us (man, that guy got Reagan good...). A big reason for the drop was that spike tailing off.
I don't think concealed carry does anything to stop crime. Nor do I think banning guns is.
We, as a country, simply do not know how to handle firearms. I know someone's going to come along and moan about that...but it's a blatant truth. We're sadistically violent. The numbers are staggering. And it's not just the seedy underbelly, either.
I don't have the answer to that...but it's not a gun problem..it's a social problem.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,341
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,341 |
Sadistically violent... no, not really IMO. Most people are not sadistically violent. How many people do you know? And how many of those are sadistically violent?
For those who aren't, to protect themselves from those who are, sometimes a good old gun is the answer. And phil, I'm no NRA freak, and if I were American I'd lean toward Dem.
gmstrong -----------------
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 750
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 750 |
You're 100% right. We're a violent culture, and banning all access to guns wouldn't change that.
Go Irish!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
For those who aren't, to protect themselves from those who are, sometimes a good old gun is the answer. And phil, I'm no NRA freak, and if I were American I'd lean toward Dem.
Sometimes a gun is a viable answer, yes.
But the gun debate has been so skewed over the years...and I do blame the NRA freaks. I'm against gun-control, but that crowd is flat-out nuts. They act like if everyone we're armed, we'd all be safe...which is sheer lunacy.
For reasons I don't have the answers to, we're an extremely violent nation. Statistically, we're off the charts. And no one wants to really address that issue...they merely want to align themselves in a camp against guns and a camp for guns...but none of the pertinent questions ever come up.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 33
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 33 |
Quote:
And, if we take guns away from law abiding citizens, I have to wonder who may have died in this situation.
Any law abiding citizen shouldn't need to worry about having criminal check to buy a hand gun then, right?
Dawg Gone
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826 |
Quote:
Quote:
And, if we take guns away from law abiding citizens, I have to wonder who may have died in this situation.
Any law abiding citizen shouldn't need to worry about having criminal check to buy a hand gun then, right?
What?
I'm not following your train of thought, but that's okay.
In order to buy a handgun, or any gun, from a dealer, a person must submit to a background check (I think they check for felonies, mental record, i.e. you haven't been judged to be a nut,.....they check your background) and that is fine.
Ah, maybe I do know where you are trying to go - the "gun show" loophole.....if that's where you are headed, yup, I agree with what would probably be your next post: we need to close that loophole.
Absolutely. If I have to submit to a background check when I go to a dealer, then I should also have to submit to a background check if I go to a gun show, and I should expect all others to be required to as well.
Absolutely. And what will that do? Absolutely nothing to safeguard the people of this country, but I agree it is something that should be looked at, and changed. Although, again, doing that would not stop the gun violence. Check out the recent shootings......Columbine - the only illegal guns there were the shotguns, which are perfectly legal. Until someone takes a hacksaw to them.
The virginia tech guy . . . legal guns under everyone's definition.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458 |
Another thing about banning guns.... If all these anti-gun folks want to ban the sales of guns in America then your going to put a lot of people out of a job. Manufacturing, gunsmiths, gun sales, all these folks would have to find other jobs---people don't seem to care about that either. They want to ban guns, and in the process they don't care about other peoples rights to use them---or other peoples jobs that rely on the sales of them, or even the peoples responsibility to own and understand how to operate a firearm. IMO, the American experiment is pretty much over. Money rules all and the gov't. wants more and more control over the population---and people want to give it to them. 
I wish to wash my Irish wristwatch......
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Man Shoots Intruder during 911
call
|
|
