News:

Long overdue maintenance happening. See post in the top forum.

Main Menu

Mass Shootings the last six months

Started by swake, December 17, 2012, 11:22:27 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

guido911

Heir is correct. The unedited version of the video shows no heckling. Just another contrived, bullcrap story. Go to 15:00 of his vid to see what actually happened. Still, that father's testimony is compelling, stirring, and jarring. And right now, his opinions need to be heard.
Someone get Hoss a pacifier.

Red Arrow

Quote from: RecycleMichael on January 29, 2013, 09:53:25 PM
But I don't want you to have one. That is all the answer I need.
I have a right to life and liberty. Your wants don't trump my rights.

I want you (and everyone else) to not have a large car/truck/SUV.  If you hit someone with a small car you will probably hurt them, maybe kill them.  Drivers of small vehicles cannot see around large vehicles.  If the driver of a small car follows at a safe distance behind a large vehicle (considering visibility) too many cars will cut in front of the small vehicle.  You don't need a large vehicle.  If you need to haul a large object, hire a professional.   If you are a professional driver, leave the job at work.  You don't need a personal large vehicle.....
 

Gaspar

Quote from: Red Arrow on January 30, 2013, 08:00:47 AM
I want you (and everyone else) to not have a large car/truck/SUV.  If you hit someone with a small car you will probably hurt them, maybe kill them.  Drivers of small vehicles cannot see around large vehicles.  If the driver of a small car follows at a safe distance behind a large vehicle (considering visibility) too many cars will cut in front of the small vehicle.  You don't need a large vehicle.  If you need to haul a large object, hire a professional.   If you are a professional driver, leave the job at work.  You don't need a personal large vehicle.....

Assault vehicles?
When attacked by a mob of clowns, always go for the juggler.

DolfanBob

Before all this gun control issue was even brought up. I have always wondered why anyone other than Military or Police "need" a assault "Rifle"
You want to protect you're self, family and property? I have no problem at all with you or anyone else owning a "GUN" Hell let's get crazy. Own two, three or nine "GUNS" I don't care. They will do the intended job. Protection.

AR-15, M-16 or whatever letters and numbers you want to throw on them. Are manufactured for one thing.
Killing large amounts of "Human Beings" in the fastest way possible. And unless you live in a "War" torn City or Country. I simply believe you or any other law abiding citizen can defend yourself with a "Gun" and leave the large scale battles to the tax payed and trained professionals.

P.S. I "want" to eat like I did when I was 18 years old. But that would also kill me. Just at a slower rate. Kinda like a .22 instead of a AK-47
Changing opinions one mistake at a time.

RecycleMichael

Quote from: Red Arrow on January 30, 2013, 08:00:47 AM
I want you (and everyone else) to not have a large car/truck/SUV. 

I am amazed at the size of SUVs. At my kid's school, most of the moms drive vehicles that could haul an entire soccer team. Of course, they only have one kid or two of their own.
Power is nothing till you use it.

Red Arrow

Quote from: DolfanBob on January 30, 2013, 08:19:30 AM
And unless you live in a "War" torn City or Country. I simply believe you or any other law abiding citizen can defend yourself with a "Gun" and leave the large scale battles to the tax payed and trained professionals.

So pretty much anything regarding weapons should be legal in places like Detroit and Chicago.
 

Red Arrow

Quote from: RecycleMichael on January 30, 2013, 08:29:23 AM
I am amazed at the size of SUVs. At my kid's school, most of the moms drive vehicles that could haul an entire soccer team. Of course, they only have one kid or two of their own.

Safety for "mom" and junior at the expense of other drivers.  It's even worse when "mom" is on the phone or texting.
 

Townsend

Banning assault rifles and large capacity clips won't work unless production is stopped worldwide.  Even then, it would take decades maybe centuries to eventually rid the planet of them

I'm not a fan of suddenly becoming a criminal if a weapon I own is deemed illegal.  I would not turn my property in simply because someone decided I shouldn't have it.

Would you let a law enforcement officer in your house to make sure your guns are all okay for you to own?  I would not.

All of this talk of this kind of ban is just pushing the paranoid to get nuts and buy the hell out of the "might be banned" guns and accessories.

Red Arrow

Quote from: Gaspar on January 30, 2013, 08:14:03 AM
Assault vehicles?

Assault vehicles (Bill Murray/"Stripes") are another whole category.  RV's should just flat be extra special, like machine guns.
 

Red Arrow

Quote from: Townsend on January 30, 2013, 08:39:58 AM
Would you let a law enforcement officer in your house to make sure your guns are all okay for you to own?  I would not.

Unless you are contemplating Police Assisted Suicide, do you really think you will stop them?  A search warrant would probably not be difficult to obtain.
 

Townsend

Quote from: Red Arrow on January 30, 2013, 08:44:26 AM
Unless you are contemplating Police Assisted Suicide, do you really think you will stop them?  A search warrant would probably not be difficult to obtain.

That's a whole other can of worms, Red.  If it's gotten to that point, it's far worse than just a ban on a particular firearm.

Red Arrow

#416
Quote from: Townsend on January 30, 2013, 08:47:53 AM
That's a whole other can of worms, Red.  If it's gotten to that point, it's far worse than just a ban on a particular firearm.

Wow!  We agree on something.

Edit:
Although that can of worms might just be the enforcement part of a ban on a particular firearm.  Why pass a law if it won't be enforced?
 

Conan71

Quote from: Townsend on January 30, 2013, 08:39:58 AM
Banning assault rifles and large capacity clips won't work unless production is stopped worldwide.  Even then, it would take decades maybe centuries to eventually rid the planet of them

I'm not a fan of suddenly becoming a criminal if a weapon I own is deemed illegal.  I would not turn my property in simply because someone decided I shouldn't have it.

Would you let a law enforcement officer in your house to make sure your guns are all okay for you to own?  I would not.

All of this talk of this kind of ban is just pushing the paranoid to get nuts and buy the hell out of the "might be banned" guns and accessories.

Very good post.  And yes, the paranoid apparently have pushed deliveries for AR's out to a year now even for law enforcement agencies.

Speaking to global production:  when the Clinton assault weapon kicked in, the Chinese ramped up production of the SKS semi-auto and dumped a ton in the US.  They were still legal as sold: wooden stock, ten round fixed magazine that you refill with stripper clips, no flash suppressor, long barrel, and no bayonet but semi-auto action.  You could buy all you wanted for $100 apiece in the 1990's.  And you can rack off ten shots as quick as you can with an AK or AR.  Stripper clips are clunkier to re-load with than dumping a mag and sticking another one in, but you could still do quite a bit of damage in a short time, if you were so inclined.

The SKS also uses the same round as an AK and Mini 30, both of which, I believe, fall into the crosshairs on the proposed new ban.
"It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first" -Ronald Reagan

Townsend

Quote from: Red Arrow on January 30, 2013, 08:50:19 AM
Why pass a law if it won't be enforced?

The ability to use it in your next political run.

To placate a group of people.

It makes for some sort of financial gain for someone giving the lawmakers money.

Red Arrow

Quote from: Townsend on January 30, 2013, 10:34:56 AM
The ability to use it in your next political run.
To placate a group of people.
It makes for some sort of financial gain for someone giving the lawmakers money.

Which, of course, don't do anything to fix the actual "problem".