Page 3 of 37 FirstFirst 12345678910111213 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 916
Like Tree87Likes

Thread: The President's Gun Proposals

  1. #51
    Wambo36 is offline Participating Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Total Posts
    804

    Default Re: The President's Gun Proposals

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Helmet View Post
    I'm certainly no gun expert...so no I had no idea.
    This is the part that makes those of us that do know weapons (I'm no expert either) want to pull our hair out. The problem is not the means with which they carry out these killings, it's the people doing it. This doesn't address that problem.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Helmet View Post
    I suppose if thats the case we should consider banning them as well.
    This is an example of the "slippery slope" argument that every one likes to put down so much, and which keeps the membership of the NRA growing.

  2. #52
    CaptDave is offline Gold Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Total Posts
    4,026

    Default Re: The President's Gun Proposals

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackmoreRulz View Post
    oh yea, that's definitely an equivalent....
    Actually it isn't, several thousand more have died since that mission was accomplished....

  3. #53
    CaptDave is offline Gold Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Total Posts
    4,026

    Default Re: The President's Gun Proposals

    Quote Originally Posted by Of Sound Mind View Post
    Indeed.

    If the "assault weapons" ban comes to fruition here in the U.S.A., I'll just head to Mexico and buy a couple of those guns the ATF lost south of the border.
    Touche

  4. #54
    kevinpate's Avatar
    kevinpate is offline Participating Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Total Posts
    11,257

    Default Re: The President's Gun Proposals

    10 shot clip,
    10 shot clip,
    see how they drool,
    see how they drool.
    It's all the rage to find them cool
    Though they'll solve nada at street or school
    10 shot clip,
    10 shot clip,

    I seem to recall, from many moons back, a simple, somewhat a rite of passage, semi-automatic, .22 caliber rifle with a barrel magazine that ran along the underneath of the barrel. No clip at all, but it held in excess of 10 rounds. Half again that many, iirc. How bizarre it might be to consider it an assault rifle, though I'll certainly concede in proper hands it could inflict mortal wounds on fowl, beast or man.

  5. #55
    ThomPaine's Avatar
    ThomPaine is offline Gold Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Total Posts
    3,036

    Default Re: The President's Gun Proposals

    Quote Originally Posted by Wambo36 View Post
    You realize of course that there is no functional difference between a semi-automatic "military style assault rifle" and the run of the mill semi-automatic hunting rifle, right? The only differences are cosmetic. Sort of like adding a spoiler and hood scoop to you parents old Civic and then calling it a race car. Again, still waiting for a definition.
    Come on, you know that's a half-truth. A tube fed .22, or a normal hunting autoloader with a 4+1 capacity, "operate" the same as a modern assault rifle, but that's like saying there's no functional difference between a Chevy Malibu and Chevy Corvette.

  6. #56
    Wambo36 is offline Participating Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Total Posts
    804

    Default Re: The President's Gun Proposals

    Quote Originally Posted by ThomPaine View Post
    Come on, you know that's a half-truth. A tube fed .22, or a normal hunting autoloader with a 4+1 capacity, "operate" the same as a modern assault rifle, but that's like saying there's no functional difference between a Chevy Malibu and Chevy Corvette.
    It's no half truth at all. I can bring you a Ruger 10/22 that over half the people on this site would swear was an assault weapon. On sight alone. I'll wager some loon could do enough damage with my old semi-auto 30-06 to have them swearing it's an assault weapon, too. Tell you what, why don't you forward me information where you found the definition they're going to use for whatever ban they're trying to pass. Until then neither one of us has any idea what semi-auto weapons, if any, are going to be exempt. In the mean time, I'll take them (the ones making the most noise about a ban) at their word.
    Of Sound Mind likes this.

  7. #57
    Achilleslastand's Avatar
    Achilleslastand is offline Participating Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Total Posts
    1,923

    Default Re: The President's Gun Proposals

    For those that dont know here is a pretty good peice about what is.....and isnt an assault rifle.
    Its a good read and far more informative then anything you will see on Fox and Cnn.
    The Truth About Assault Weapons
    Of Sound Mind likes this.

  8. #58
    MadMonk Guest

    Default Re: The President's Gun Proposals

    Quote Originally Posted by ThomPaine View Post
    Come on, you know that's a half-truth. A tube fed .22, or a normal hunting autoloader with a 4+1 capacity, "operate" the same as a modern assault rifle, but that's like saying there's no functional difference between a Chevy Malibu and Chevy Corvette.
    Hold on, that's hardly true (mainly the part about the hunting rifle, not the .22 obviously). Other than the obvious capability for fully automatic and burst fire, the M4 isn't much different than the M14s that the military used to use and that are widely used for hunting, except improvements were made in materials to make it lighter, more reliable and have the ability to mount a wide variety of accessories.

    This is a civilian M14:


    This is the improved version the military used to use (has been phased out):


    The use the same ammo and have the same capacity, but the military one has been improved with lighter, plastic stocks and body that are more flexible in their arrangement for a better fit for the user, easier to handle pistol grip and lots of locations to mount accessories. They are both semi-auto and use the same ammunition, but one looks scarier than the other so it would be considered an assault rifle, while the other a hunting rifle. The differences have no effect on the lethality of the weapon, only the aesthetics and weight. The AR-15s that people are so afraid of are no different than the civilian M14 in operation, only in looks and a slightly larger magazine (30 instead of 20), but because they use plastic instead of wood, they seem scarier to people who don't know the difference.

    I guess the point I'm trying to make is that the functions are the same, except one can be used for full auto firing and that is what makes it an assault rifle, not the grip, stock, or any other aesthetic item.

  9. #59
    ThomPaine's Avatar
    ThomPaine is offline Gold Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Total Posts
    3,036

    Default Re: The President's Gun Proposals

    Quote Originally Posted by MadMonk View Post
    Hold on, that's hardly true (mainly the part about the hunting rifle, not the .22 obviously). Other than the obvious capability for fully automatic and burst fire, the M4 isn't much different than the M14s that the military used to use and that are widely used for hunting, except improvements were made in materials to make it lighter, more reliable and have the ability to mount a wide variety of accessories.
    Again, I don't want an "assault weapons" ban anyway, but maybe it's like pornography: we can't necessarily define it, but we know it when we see it!
    Plutonic Panda likes this.

  10. #60
    mkjeeves is offline Participating Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Total Posts
    1,501

    Default Re: The President's Gun Proposals

    but the military one has been improved with lighter, plastic stocks and body that are more flexible in their arrangement for a better fit for the user, easier to handle pistol grip and lots of locations to mount accessories.
    For greater mobility and to add accessories, both for how they aid with assaults (as opposed to hunting.) Sure, you can take an assault rifle hunting and make an assault with a hunting rifle but they have different design features for a reason.

  11. #61
    kelroy55's Avatar
    kelroy55 is offline Gold Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Total Posts
    3,859

    Default Re: The President's Gun Proposals

    Quote Originally Posted by kevinpate View Post
    10 shot clip,
    10 shot clip,
    see how they drool,
    see how they drool.
    It's all the rage to find them cool
    Though they'll solve nada at street or school
    10 shot clip,
    10 shot clip,

    I seem to recall, from many moons back, a simple, somewhat a rite of passage, semi-automatic, .22 caliber rifle with a barrel magazine that ran along the underneath of the barrel. No clip at all, but it held in excess of 10 rounds. Half again that many, iirc. How bizarre it might be to consider it an assault rifle, though I'll certainly concede in proper hands it could inflict mortal wounds on fowl, beast or man.
    I still have one of those in the closet.

  12. #62
    Of Sound Mind's Avatar
    Of Sound Mind is offline Gold Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Total Posts
    913

    Default Re: The President's Gun Proposals

    Quote Originally Posted by mkjeeves View Post
    For greater mobility and to add accessories, both for how they aid with assaults (as opposed to hunting.)
    ... and defense.

  13. #63
    Of Sound Mind's Avatar
    Of Sound Mind is offline Gold Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Total Posts
    913

    Default Re: The President's Gun Proposals

    Name:  398018_241722025960983_662911526_n.jpg
Views: 86
Size:  21.5 KB

  14. #64
    mkjeeves is offline Participating Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Total Posts
    1,501

    Default Re: The President's Gun Proposals

    Quote Originally Posted by kelroy55 View Post
    I still have one of those in the closet.
    My Remington Model 24 holds 14 short 22 shells in the stock feed tube. (Great-grandad's squirrel gun.)
    kelroy55 likes this.

  15. #65
    mkjeeves is offline Participating Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Total Posts
    1,501

    Default Re: The President's Gun Proposals

    Quote Originally Posted by Of Sound Mind View Post
    ... and defense.
    Exactly. For better ability to move and kill people from further away and/or in the dark with something like a tactical flashlight and laser sight than with other types of defensive weapons, as opposed to how one would typically use a gun to hunt.

  16. #66
    ThomPaine's Avatar
    ThomPaine is offline Gold Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Total Posts
    3,036

    Default Re: The President's Gun Proposals

    Another example of why this is difficult. I ran across one of the guys on MSNBC last night - Lawrence O'Donnell. He was talking about how he thought Tom Selleck should follow President Bush's lead and disassociate himself from the NRA.

    I have no problem with him stating his opinions, but he was just a complete idiot when he started discussing other NRA board members. He discussed Brownell's and their current owner being a rich kid who inherited his father's company, ,etc., etc., etc., and how Brownell's is, in essence, some merchant of death. Blech.

    I guess calm, normal folks from either side don't stand a chance...
    Wambo36 and CaptDave like this.

  17. #67
    RadicalModerate is offline Participating Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Total Posts
    8,230
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default Re: The President's Gun Proposals

    When Murder Weapons Are Outlawed,
    Only Murderers Will Be Outlaws.

    Legal (even in California) Framing Hammer


    Semi-Automatic Framing Hammer (outlawed 2019)


    Fully-Automatic "Annhilator" Hammer (outlawed 2019)

  18. #68
    Just the facts's Avatar
    Just the facts is offline Gold Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Total Posts
    11,611

    Default Re: The President's Gun Proposals

    Ooops... Maybe politicians should try reading bills first.

    Politics | NY passes toughest gun laws in country | Queens Courier

    Less than a week after Governor Andrew Cuomo promised to make New York the leader in gun safety, the State Legislature voted in favor of the Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement, or NY SAFE Act, that would effectively keep weapons away from the mentally ill and crack down on illegal guns.

    The State Senate voted 43-18 in favor of a broad gun package around 11 p.m. on Monday, January 14; the Assembly voted 104-43 the following day, after hours of debate, to make the bill official.

    Many opponents in the Assembly argued the bill was hastily thrown together in order for the state to be an example for the country. As a result, opponents said, registered gun owners would suffer.
    Additions to be made to gun laws for law enforcement | 7online.com

    NEW YORK (WABC) -- A troubling oversight has been found within New York State's sweeping new gun laws.

    The ban on having high-capacity magazines, as it's written, would also include law enforcement officers.

    Magazines with more than seven rounds will be illegal under the new law when that part takes effect in March.

    Nearly every law enforcement agency in the state carries hand guns that have a 15 round capacity.

    ...

    The Patrolman's Benevolent Association President released a statement saying, "The PBA is actively working to enact changes to this law that will provide the appropriate exemptions from the law for active and retired law enforcement officers."

    State Senator Eric Adams, a former NYPD Captain, told us he's going to push for an amendment next week to exempt police officers from the high-capacity magazine ban. In his words, "You can't give more ammo to the criminals"
    Why does a retired law enforcement officer get exempted? What happens when the police become the criminals? I wonder if someone planning a mass shooting is concerned they might be violating the 7 round capacity law.
    Wambo36, MadMonk and Of Sound Mind like this.
    Third Place

  19. #69
    RadicalModerate is offline Participating Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Total Posts
    8,230
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default Re: The President's Gun Proposals

    Why does a retired law enforcement officer get exempted? What happens when the police become the criminals? I wonder if someone planning a mass shooting is concerned they might be violating the 7 round capacity law.
    Maybe because at some point they took an oath to uphold the Constitution and all local statutes in effect at the time of their hiring? Say! Maybe The Gideons could provide stacks of Bibles at Retail Outlets and Gun Shows for buyers to swear on . . . ?

  20. #70
    MadMonk Guest

    Default Re: The President's Gun Proposals

    Quote Originally Posted by mkjeeves View Post
    For greater mobility and to add accessories, both for how they aid with assaults (as opposed to hunting.) Sure, you can take an assault rifle hunting and make an assault with a hunting rifle but they have different design features for a reason.
    So, we aren't allowed to take advantage of improvement in benign technology such as lighter materials and convenience features because they were developed initially for military reasons? That's like saying you can't use your high speed internet because there are people out there abusing it for child pornography. Back to 28.8k dial-up for you then!
    Of Sound Mind and Prunepicker like this.

  21. #71
    Just the facts's Avatar
    Just the facts is offline Gold Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Total Posts
    11,611

    Default Re: The President's Gun Proposals

    Quote Originally Posted by RadicalModerate View Post
    Maybe because at some point they took an oath to uphold the Constitution and all local statutes in effect at the time of their hiring? Say! Maybe The Gideons could provide stacks of Bibles at Retail Outlets and Gun Shows for buyers to swear on . . . ?
    I took an oath to uphold the constitution on Sept 9, 1990 (and 2 more times since then), do I get exempted as well?
    Dubya61 likes this.
    Third Place

  22. #72
    ThomPaine's Avatar
    ThomPaine is offline Gold Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Total Posts
    3,036

    Default Re: The President's Gun Proposals

    Quote Originally Posted by Just the facts View Post
    I took an oath to uphold the constitution on Sept 9, 1990 (and 2 more times since then), do I get exempted as well?
    I would grant you an exception, because I know you've only got 7 years left to prepare...
    Dubya61 likes this.

  23. #73
    Just the facts's Avatar
    Just the facts is offline Gold Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Total Posts
    11,611

    Default Re: The President's Gun Proposals

    Quote Originally Posted by ThomPaine View Post
    I would grant you an exception, because I know you've only got 7 years left to prepare...
    Good one, but life doesn't end in 7 years. Care to guess how governments and constitutions France has had since 1776? France is currently on their 5th constitutional Republic since 1851. The US has done a pretty good job of keeping one constitution for +200 years but clearly there are now atleast 2 primary concepts of what government should and should not do in this country.

    Call me crazy if I don't think we can keep it together. We have crisis at every turn, from society to financial to religion to immigration. We haven't had a federal budget in 4 years, we are having to increase the debt limit every 16 months, the President's job council (which he was going to focus like a laser beam on) has never met - not even once, and the only way the federal government can keep from defaulting is to borrow money directly from the federal reserve who is creating it out of thin air (and then we call that growth). And what do we have to show for $16 trillion worth of debt (and the trillions of government spending that isn't debt) - nothing except a crumbling interstate system. Hell, we don't even have a single mile of dedicated high speed rail.

    You know, I can see why the government doesn't want us having guns.
    Third Place

  24. #74
    kelroy55's Avatar
    kelroy55 is offline Gold Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Total Posts
    3,859

    Default Re: The President's Gun Proposals

    This will probably get some interesting responses but I was wondering....

    Many, if not most, people on the right are against any form of gun control and many have stated they will rise up against their government if the government tries to enact gun control. I don't think anyone disagrees that guns do kill people, and quite a few at that. So even though it's a fact that guns kill people the same people are against abortions because they claim it kills people. Name:  shrug.gif
Views: 67
Size:  275 Bytes

  25. #75
    Of Sound Mind's Avatar
    Of Sound Mind is offline Gold Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Total Posts
    913

    Default Re: The President's Gun Proposals

    Quote Originally Posted by kelroy55 View Post
    This will probably get some interesting responses but I was wondering....Many, if not most, people on the right are against any form of gun control and many have stated they will rise up against their government if the government tries to enact gun control. I don't think anyone disagrees that guns do kill people, and quite a few at that. So even though it's a fact that guns kill people the same people are against abortions because they claim it kills people. Name:  shrug.gif
Views: 67
Size:  275 Bytes
    Really?

    I'm against people killing people (unless it's in self-defense).

    Guns do not kill people. People can use guns to kill people. I'm against people using guns to kill people (unless it's in self-defense). I'm not against guns or people owning guns.

    Knives do not kill people. People can use knives to kill people. I'm against people using knives to kill people (unless it's in self-defense). I'm not against knives or people owning knives.

    Hammers do not kill people. People can use hammers to kill people. I'm against people using hammers to kill people (unless it's in self-defense). I'm not against hammers or people owning hammers.

    Hands, feet and fists by themselves do not kill people. People can use hands, feet or fists to kill people. I'm against people using hands, feet or fists to kill people (unless it's in self-defense). I'm certainly not against hands, feet and fists or people having hands, feet and fists.

    Abortion is an intentional act of killing a living human being.

    I'm against people using whatever means and/or tools to kill a living human being. I'm not against the tools themselves.
    Wambo36 likes this.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-15-2012, 05:58 PM
  2. Taxi boat proposals higher than expected
    By BailJumper in forum General Civic Issues
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 11-19-2006, 01:34 AM
  3. Taxi boat proposals higher than expected
    By BailJumper in forum General Civic Issues
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-08-2006, 01:11 AM
  4. 9/11 Dad, Republican: 'The President's gone insane'
    By PUGalicious in forum Current Events & Open Topic
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-20-2006, 07:41 PM
  5. Most oppose president's Social Security Plan
    By Patrick in forum Politics
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 03-22-2005, 02:19 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1