Creative Vikings wrote:Melpomenia wrote:It actually is. Do you think we should be shoving automatic AN-94s into the hand of every crazy on the street?
Even if you don't, you don't have need of an assault rifle. it's military hardware. If you want to hunt, you can use a hunting rifle; as is, if every civilian-owned gun in the United States was replaced with a pistol, it would still be practically impossible for the government to turn the nation into one-party state, or dictatorial regime, or what-have-you.
I can see you play educational video-games like Call of Duty: Black Ops II. Nice to have an enlightened mind in this discussion.
Honestly, my first thought was, "Lawl, BF3," but that's just me.
Gauthier wrote:Saiwania wrote:
If you do not need an assault weapon, then why do you need a shotgun, rifle, or pistol? Are you for arbitrarily banning the sale of certain types of weaponry on the basis that you won't "need" that type of firearm?
If you need 30 round magazines to hunt deer, you're pretty much incompetent as a hunter.
You, too, show your incompetence as a potential hunter. In the state of Missouri, magazines are limited to 10 rounds (due to the popular use of Lee-Enfields when deer season first opened way back when). Many other states limit the magazine capacity to five rounds which is what pretty much 98% of all bolt-action rifles are capable of holding. I suggest some reading to you: just fill it in with your state after "in".
Bug Out wrote:Cameroi wrote:it isn't the logic that guns can be stopped. it is the logic that if there are fewer of them to go around, there is less ease and convenience to killing large numbers of people, because someone wakes up one morning with a wild hair up their ass and a mad on at some group of people or humans in general. or even other life forms for that matter.
for reasons equally incomprehensible to me, it isn't my proposal to simply manufacture fewer of them that is being discussed.
i mean if you want to over throw governments, there are always improvised explosive devices.
and if you want bambi on the dinner table, you really don't need a fully automatic assault weapon. you can do that by any number of other means, such as archery, spears, or even traps.
Please tell me when a fully automatic rifle was used in a mass civilian shooting? I can't think of one. I remember when two people robbed a bank with assault rifles (AK's), but the only death was one of the robbers.
Also worth noting that the AKs used in the North Hollywood Shootout were also illegally modified firearms, and obviously unregistered to boot: a federal crime worth 10 years of "colonoscopies" and roughly $10,000.
Tmutarakhan wrote:Blazedtown wrote:
You realize how retarded that argument is? If you ran a multi billion dollar a year drug cartel with global contacts capable of smuggling literally hundreds of tons contraband a year, and operate in Latin America, one of global arms deal hot spots, and you're saying they would rather pay consumer market prices rather than buying in bulk from professional arms dealers.
The US is where they buy from. They would not do so if the US was not such a cheap ample supply.
If you were a cartel leader, worth millions of dollars, with your own private air fleet of, say, retired DC-3s, what would you rather do?
- Pay some dude to sneak himself into the United States, find a straw purchaser, pay said purchaser ~$750.00 for a semi-automatic AK, attempt to smuggle said AK back into Mexico, use semi-automatic AK to shoot at other gang members.
OR
- Tell pilot of one of your planes to fly to Somalia, trade several kilograms of cocaine for an entire plane full of fully-automatic AKs, fly back to Mexico, and use said full-autos to shoot at other gang members.
The only reason the ones they found in Mexico came back to the U.S. was because the BATFE, through Fast and Furious, purposefully sent guns over the border to "see what happens." Not only that, but of the firearms captured, the only ones traceable back to a store were from the United States. Why? Because you can't trace all the black market guns they found with them.
Nova_Ravenna wrote:Cameroi wrote:good for him. and precisely what were you planning on doing with these guns it is falsely proclaimed the current u.s president has any slightest interest in "taking"?
if you seriously imagine you need a fully automatic ak 47 to eat bambi, might i suggest you work on improving your ability to aim?
First off i would never lay a hand on that soviet pile of crap. Secondly i dont need it to kill bambie , i need it to stop government oppresion. AKA george washington didnt win independance with strongly worded letters.
Here's the rifle I took hunting this year. Also, the AK is far from a pile of crap. Can it work with a pile of crap in the receiver? Of course. Is it a pile of crap? Nyet.
Holy Trek wrote:
GOOD! Let him take YOUR guns! Honestly, if you need an AK-47 to go hunting, then you aren't a hunter, period.
See other part of this post. I donate all harvested meat to charity. Rather I let folks go hungry because you don't like my choice of firearm?
Plus, ONLY THE MILITARY AND LAW-ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL NEED ASSAULT RIFLES! If you're one of those "Doomsday nitwits" who claim to be stocking up on guns and ammo in case of an apocalypse of some sort, here's a newsflash for you..."No one knows when the Final Days will come, not even the angels in heaven. Only the Heavenly Father knows the day that his Son will return." And lets be REALLY honest here, would you truly be ready for an apocalypse?? No.
No one knows, that's why they prepare.
Moving on, I personally collect firearms due to my interest in them. I am a self-taught, albeit amateur, gunsmith, and have become a go-to for folks at the gun store I work at for more or less anything Soviet in origin. I am working on my history major, currently, and the historical significance of the firearms I collect is something that I, and many others, find interesting. It is also fun for me to work on internals of my firearms myself and tune them to my own personal tastes. It is not that different at all from someone who collects cars and works on the motor.
26 people died last Friday....out of that, 20 were little children who had yet to truly experience life. And here you sit, trying to cause a panic by saying "Obama is coming for your guns".
Those that wish to keep their firearms do have to be on the defensive somewhat when many folks begin rallying for the banning of certain types of firearms, based purely on appearance and name. Do you know how many gun owners are in the United States? It's approaching close to 50-55 million. Do you know how many used their firearms in a school shooting last Friday? One. Responsible gun owners have the right to be upset that their hobby is being threatened (to a degree) due to the actions of one unstable individual. Perhaps we should ban cars because people have used them in smash-and-grabs at jewelry stores. Steak knives due to the Manson Family. Pencils due to that kid who stabbed my brother with one in elementary school. See where this is going? With many tools/objects, we overlook the one guy who went pretty far out-there in terms of rationality. Why? Because it was an everyday item that we all use. Only half of us use/own firearms, give or take, so when one person out of 50m+ uses it in a very incorrect manner, that other 50% (well, not the entire 50%, of course) figures that since they have fun by not having firearms, everyone else should be limited as to what hobbies they can enjoy, too. It is unfair, and is very similar to a gym class no longer being able to play dodgeball because one student did something stupid.
He is NOT challenging Americans' right to bear arms in self-defense, he is preventing the use of assault rifles by people who aren't qualified to even own one, let alone fire one.
Assault rifles are already that way. The price for a transferable AKM is roughly $20,000.00, requires a submission of finger and palm prints to the BATFE, a submission of a Form IV (or other appropriate form) with a mandatory stamp tax of $200.00. After this letter/form is sent in with the prints, two passport photographs, and the county sheriff's approval of the purchase, the individual gets to play the waiting game for eight months or longer before they ever see their select-fire assault rifle. These are NFA items (National Firearms Act [of 1934]). Do you know how many NFA items were used in a crime since 1934? Two. One of which was a crime committed by a police officer.
Plus, I'm pretty sure the Founding Fathers didn't have AK-47s and Kalashnikovs in mind when they wrote the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Better cancel your internet subscription, then, or go ahead and let SOPA pass. Your choice.
If you're that afraid of Obama, tuck your tail between your legs and flee to Canada! Maybe you should think about those 20 children murdered in cold-blood
I have thought of them. I have also come to the conclusion that the problem is not firearms, but the lack of a focus on those with potential mental deficiencies (whatever they may be) causing these types of folks to believe the only correct "answer" to their problems is to kill. Perhaps they seek attention? It would make sense: the media likes to rate school shootings like a competition. "Worst one since ____!" Somewhere, some nut-job is probably thinking, "I can do better." Let's focus on that instead of, "Let's just get rid of guns so we don't have to actually worry about people!"
by a crazed man with a Bushmaster assault rifle before you continue to stoke the anti-Obama rhetoric.
Bushmaster is a company, not a type of rifle. The rifle used was a Bushmaster XM-15 (AR-15) which is a semi-automatic .223/5.56 carbine often times used for varmint hunting (coyotes, prairie dogs, fox, etc.) and general recreational shooting. It is no more deadly than this:
To the Mods: PLEASE lock this thread so this......person....cannot continue to post this garbage.
Because who needs the First Amendment, too, right?
Tyrants wrote:If you need an AK-47 or an M16 to hunt with, then you shouldn't be allowed anywhere with 5 miles of a gun. Oh, and you may need a cane and seeing-eye dog.
I think this is a first having to address this point three times in one post. Way to go: mind reading up on some firearms specifics (semi-automatic =/= automatic) and hunting laws? I hunt with a semi-automatic AK-103 clone in 7.62x39mm utilizing a five-round magazine (my 10-round is TAPCO, and I dislike it for that reason). 7.62x39mm ballistics are roughly on-par with .30-30 Winchester. Since I'd be using aimed fire (this should be obvious, but I feel I must point it out), that means I would not be spraying blindly.
That said, my effective rate of fire and effective range of lethality for ethically harvesting game would be the same for this rifle (AK-103-alike) as it would be for this rifle:
Perhaps through this post you will all have learned why we "pro-gunners!" tend to be quite defensive on the subject. It is not only because those wishing to implement a ban are wishing to do so based almost solely on appearances, but on things they have absolutely no understanding of.
Perhaps I should become the sole dictator of car safety standards. I mean, I've never even taken a Drivers-Ed class, but I saw some cars in a movie once and heard about a few multi-car pile-ups on the news a couple times. Same credentials as many "anti-gunners," so why not?
EDIT FOR TOP PAGE GUN PORN, REGARDLESS OF THREAD!
