Gun Rights: Should you be allowed to own an RPG?
01-11-2013, 10:38 AM
#381
Maybe "nothing" was the wrong word. I really was referring to a ban of some sort. I just don't see it happening. Now improving the current systems and laws to help them be more effective is just fine by me. I don't have any problem with a more robust background checking system like you mentioned. I welcome changes that address the real problem and may actually be effective without restricting individual liberties.
Reply
0
0
01-11-2013, 11:02 AM
#382
The anti-gunners don't want "real solutions". They want do disarm civilians and confiscate guns. Allowing actual laws to pass that work goes against their goal, which is whey they've convinced the anti-gun public that an AWB and mag-bans are "THE SOLUTION" to the "gun problem" in this country... specifically because they know it won't work. What it does is allow certain politicians to look the public square in the eye and say "I did something!" The public has been led to believe that an AWB's will lead to never turning the TV on and seeing another shooting... call it "social engineering" or whatever fancy term is current for brain-washing.
In a few years or more when nothing has changed (by design), they can take it another step, and another, and another, until they reach their goal.
For Brain... tactical chopsticks = BAN!!!:
Carbon Fiber, not shitting you!
Navy SEALs have wanted these for years as standard issue:
Reply
0
0
01-11-2013, 01:52 PM
#384
A side effect of being shot is sometimes death, but when using a firearm in self-defense, saying "I'm gonna kill anybody who comes through my front door" is murder if your intent is to actually kill them as you pull the trigger. IT's NOT a subtle distinction in the courtroom, and where many people end up getting charged with crimes is when at the scene, they tell the cops, "That ************ was in my house and I pointed the gun at his head and kept pulling the trigger... no ******* robs me and lives!" Those words, and phrases like it uttered in anger during the aftermath of an otherwise righteous shooting is the stuff DA's in anti-gun cities have wet dreams over.
Smart people use a firearm in self-defense as one of the last layers in a planned and practiced overall approach to personal safety. Owning a gun with the thought process of actually intending to kill somebody when the time for self defense comes is somebody who has never really thought it over. The goal in any self-defense situation of any kind, using any weapon, under any circumstances is to simply render a person unable or unwilling to continue their actions against you... nothing more.
Last edited by samnavy; 01-11-2013 at 10:07 PM.
Reply
0
0
01-14-2013, 12:29 PM
#387
From POTUS statement today:
So what part of the constitution would you like to wipe your *** on today?
"My understanding is the vice president's going to provide a range of steps that we can take to reduce gun violence," said Obama. "Some of them will require legislation, some of them I can accomplish through executive action...
Reply
0
0
01-15-2013, 08:41 AM
#391
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,688
Total Cats: 4,113
Joe Perez style rant:
MARK LEVIN: I'm not into imperial presidents who act imperial and speak imperial and Obama forgets there's a Constitution. Yes, he keeps telling us he won reelection. Congratulations, but guess what? The Constitution wasn't up for election, it's not up for a referendum. He has to comply with it, too.
He was sent back to Washington, but he's got a strict list of rules that he has to follow as president. When he gets up there and starts saying, if Congress doesn't do this, I'm going to do this unilaterally, it violates separation of power a lot of the times. And this is a man pushing the edge of the envelope as far as i'm concerned, whether it's the appointment clause, whether it's his unilateral action on immigration, whether it's trashing the commerce clause and the tax clauses under Obamacare. Now they're talking about executive orders on the Second Amendment. They've issued regulations on First Amendment attacking religious liberty. This notion that he might be able to lift the debt ceiling, you know, unilaterally under the Fourteenth Amendment.
What the hell is this? He was elected president. Congratulations. This guy makes Richard Nixon look like a man who followed the law all the time. I think we have an imperial president, he sounds imperial, he's arrogant as hell and I'm furious about this and I'm going to tell you why. We are a magnificent country. We don't need to be turned upside down. We don't need to run from crisis to crisis to crisis. He's bankrupting this country.
He said we've had a discussion about the debt. When did we have a discussion about the debt? We've had a debate about taxes. The man's never around to have a discussion about anything. So, yes, he causes me to be furious when I watch and listen to him.
He was sent back to Washington, but he's got a strict list of rules that he has to follow as president. When he gets up there and starts saying, if Congress doesn't do this, I'm going to do this unilaterally, it violates separation of power a lot of the times. And this is a man pushing the edge of the envelope as far as i'm concerned, whether it's the appointment clause, whether it's his unilateral action on immigration, whether it's trashing the commerce clause and the tax clauses under Obamacare. Now they're talking about executive orders on the Second Amendment. They've issued regulations on First Amendment attacking religious liberty. This notion that he might be able to lift the debt ceiling, you know, unilaterally under the Fourteenth Amendment.
What the hell is this? He was elected president. Congratulations. This guy makes Richard Nixon look like a man who followed the law all the time. I think we have an imperial president, he sounds imperial, he's arrogant as hell and I'm furious about this and I'm going to tell you why. We are a magnificent country. We don't need to be turned upside down. We don't need to run from crisis to crisis to crisis. He's bankrupting this country.
He said we've had a discussion about the debt. When did we have a discussion about the debt? We've had a debate about taxes. The man's never around to have a discussion about anything. So, yes, he causes me to be furious when I watch and listen to him.
Reply
0
0
01-15-2013, 09:01 AM
#392
And NY is the first to fall. At 10am their bill is expected to pass limiting magazines to 7rounds. And it is still unclear if anything will be grandfathered in.
New York Senate Passes Gun-Control Laws - WSJ.com
Its like selling a car. You ask for more than you want so there is room to haggle and makes the other side thing they got a good deal.
Draconian much? It also says nothing about this being restrictive to rifles. So pistols are included from what I can tell.
They just made Criminals out of law biding citizens.
I have to say. If something like this passed in my state, I would take my weapons to friends or families who live out of state and start job hunting asap.
New York Senate Passes Gun-Control Laws - WSJ.com
Its like selling a car. You ask for more than you want so there is room to haggle and makes the other side thing they got a good deal.
"It is well-balanced, it protects the Second Amendment," said Senate Republican leader Dean Skelos of Long Island. "And there is no confiscation of weapons, which was at one time being considered.
Draconian much? It also says nothing about this being restrictive to rifles. So pistols are included from what I can tell.
"Ammunition magazines would be restricted to seven bullets, from the current 10, and current owners of higher-capacity magazines would have a year to sell them out of state. An owner caught at home with eight or more bullets in a magazine could face a misdemeanor charge."
I have to say. If something like this passed in my state, I would take my weapons to friends or families who live out of state and start job hunting asap.
Last edited by Tekel; 01-15-2013 at 09:17 AM.
Reply
0
0
01-15-2013, 10:15 AM
#393
And NY is the first to fall. At 10am their bill is expected to pass limiting magazines to 7rounds. And it is still unclear if anything will be grandfathered in.
New York Senate Passes Gun-Control Laws - WSJ.com
Its like selling a car. You ask for more than you want so there is room to haggle and makes the other side thing they got a good deal.
Draconian much? It also says nothing about this being restrictive to rifles. So pistols are included from what I can tell.
They just made Criminals out of law biding citizens.
I have to say. If something like this passed in my state, I would take my weapons to friends or families who live out of state and start job hunting asap.
New York Senate Passes Gun-Control Laws - WSJ.com
Its like selling a car. You ask for more than you want so there is room to haggle and makes the other side thing they got a good deal.
Draconian much? It also says nothing about this being restrictive to rifles. So pistols are included from what I can tell.
They just made Criminals out of law biding citizens.
I have to say. If something like this passed in my state, I would take my weapons to friends or families who live out of state and start job hunting asap.
The whole thing is playing out exactly as has been foretold. Of course there'll be years of lawsuits and court challenges costing the people of New York tens of millions of dollars, and of course there will be zero decrease in any kind of gun crime for obvious reasons, but at least Cuomo can use the "I'm tough on gun-crime" platform when he runs for President in '16.
However, in a few years after there has been no decrease in crime, and after law enforcement agencies in upstate NY have refused to enforce the laws, they will simply enact more laws... and THOSE are the ones that will start with confiscation. You won't be able to take a banned gun to the range or out hunting, and you won't be able to use one in self-defense, even if inside the home for risk of a felony. I'm not a fan of "New Yorker's" in general for all the typical sterotypical reasons, which is to say that they're loud, obnoxious, and love a good fight... so to watch them open wide and swallow this dick with their eyes open is pretty sad.
It's really amazing to see this kind of legislation pass, and then see exact opposite stuff that's about to pass in Wyoming and Montana.
Reply
0
0
01-15-2013, 10:19 AM
#394
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,688
Total Cats: 4,113
there has almost been an equal number of deaths from shooting in chicago alone to match the sandy elementary shooting...and chicago has one of the strictest gun laws in the country.
so gun control is absolutely a proven-to-work law: the govt gets more power over its citizens.
so gun control is absolutely a proven-to-work law: the govt gets more power over its citizens.
Reply
0
0
01-15-2013, 11:08 AM
#396
Tour de Franzia
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Republic of Dallas
Posts: 29,085
Total Cats: 375
Yes, all guns and magazines of all types are included, and no grandfathering except for law enforcement.
The whole thing is playing out exactly as has been foretold. Of course there'll be years of lawsuits and court challenges costing the people of New York tens of millions of dollars, and of course there will be zero decrease in any kind of gun crime for obvious reasons, but at least Cuomo can use the "I'm tough on gun-crime" platform when he runs for President in '16.
However, in a few years after there has been no decrease in crime, and after law enforcement agencies in upstate NY have refused to enforce the laws, they will simply enact more laws... and THOSE are the ones that will start with confiscation. You won't be able to take a banned gun to the range or out hunting, and you won't be able to use one in self-defense, even if inside the home for risk of a felony. I'm not a fan of "New Yorker's" in general for all the typical sterotypical reasons, which is to say that they're loud, obnoxious, and love a good fight... so to watch them open wide and swallow this dick with their eyes open is pretty sad.
It's really amazing to see this kind of legislation pass, and then see exact opposite stuff that's about to pass in Wyoming and Montana.
The whole thing is playing out exactly as has been foretold. Of course there'll be years of lawsuits and court challenges costing the people of New York tens of millions of dollars, and of course there will be zero decrease in any kind of gun crime for obvious reasons, but at least Cuomo can use the "I'm tough on gun-crime" platform when he runs for President in '16.
However, in a few years after there has been no decrease in crime, and after law enforcement agencies in upstate NY have refused to enforce the laws, they will simply enact more laws... and THOSE are the ones that will start with confiscation. You won't be able to take a banned gun to the range or out hunting, and you won't be able to use one in self-defense, even if inside the home for risk of a felony. I'm not a fan of "New Yorker's" in general for all the typical sterotypical reasons, which is to say that they're loud, obnoxious, and love a good fight... so to watch them open wide and swallow this dick with their eyes open is pretty sad.
It's really amazing to see this kind of legislation pass, and then see exact opposite stuff that's about to pass in Wyoming and Montana.
Reply
0
0
01-15-2013, 12:01 PM
#399
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,688
Total Cats: 4,113
"90% of violence" is associated with violent gangs in Oakland...We should probably enact some gang control laws 
Oakland Officials Blame Woman’s Murder For Setting Off Violent Crime War
Oakland Officials Blame Woman’s Murder For Setting Off Violent Crime War
Reply
0
0
