The Gun Control debate thread

[sean miguel]

I'd agree with this. If some asshole tries to invade my home my guns should serve as a serious deterrent. Conversely, if the government sends M-1 tanks rolling down my block, I'm pretty much fucked just standing there holding a shotgun for "protection against a tyrannical government".

Hey....if I can own an AR-15 why can't I have a tank? That would be so cool....even if it was just a light armored vehicle like a Bradley or something. Instead, they have to draw the line at automatic weapons. What a buzzkill! I sure could have used a tank during the recent flooding we had here in Texas!

I'm not sure how effective M1 tanks were against an insurgency in an urban setting like say, Fallujah. I'm sure they provided cover.

No, even if you could have a tank, you still can't match the arsenal the federal government has at their disposal. But matching them at every level isn't the point. It's giving them pause. Unless it's gotten to the point of extermination and not just arrest and seizure, some asshole with 3 bold letters on their vest and armed with a rifle is going to be kicking down your door. At the very least, you should be able to match that level of force.


I just don't buy the argument that the 2nd amendment as a check against the federal government no longer applies because we're beyond the age of muskets. Were people allowed to have cannons and mortars back then?

 

[Mr. Daystar]

Historical correction, my friend. It was under the Reagan administration that the ban was enacted. Clinton did not become president until January, 1993.

My dates are off, but clinton DID put an assault weapons ban in place, and part of that is still applicable to full auto, and the parts you need for them. I can't recall regan enacting any gun laws of major consequence....other then what he traded to Afghanistan for that heroin he need for the contras, or something like that. I can't even keep the lying stupidity straight anymore dude. All I know is, a bunch of people shouldn't be allowed to own AR-15's, but a bunch of people should be allowed to own them...and I'm in the group that IS, and I don't intend to stop fighting for that right.

 

[Jagger69]

Understood. Just making note of the fact that the FOPA from 1986 was during Reagan's administration. Clinton signed additional legislation during his presidency as well that was aimed (pardon the pun) at assault rifles specifically.

 

[Jagger69]

I'm not sure how effective M1 tanks were against an insurgency in an urban setting like say, Fallujah. I'm sure they provided cover.

No, even if you could have a tank, you still can't match the arsenal the federal government has at their disposal. But matching them at every level isn't the point. It's giving them pause. Unless it's gotten to the point of extermination and not just arrest and seizure, some asshole with 3 bold letters on their vest and armed with a rifle is going to be kicking down your door. At the very least, you should be able to match that level of force.


I just don't buy the argument that the 2nd amendment as a check against the federal government no longer applies because we're beyond the age of muskets. Were people allowed to have cannons and mortars back then?

I get all that. I'm just saying it would be cool to have a tank!

 

[sean miguel]

I get all that. I'm just saying it would be cool to have a tank!

German Tiger for me :thumbsup:

 

[Straight Shooter]

I just don't buy the argument that the 2nd amendment as a check against the federal government no longer applies because we're beyond the age of muskets. Were people allowed to have cannons and mortars back then?

It was the wild west in those days. You had a musket, the government(military) had a musket. If you wanted a cannon, you could get a cannon. You're pretty much on even ground there. But you have to be pretty delusional to think that you would stand a chance against the United States military. And I'm just talking about our conventional forces (Army, Marines, etc). Good luck taking on the Navy Seals or Delta Force :thumbsup:

 

[Bloodshot Scott]

The government can so outpass you (with drones for instance) that the purpose of the 2nd Amendment is rendered obsolete.

An absurd "point". This is to (erroneously) assume our government people will do such to their own families, neighbors, friends, colleagues...


They're going to drop a nuke on...Oklahoma City? Utter nonsense.


As far as the "gun control" debate bullshit...that's what it is, bullshit.


The left wants to ban "assault" weapons, when in reality it's total and utter bullshit.


It's not easy to carry around an AR (of which automatics are next to impossible to even get your hands on - they are by definition SEMI-automatic RIFLES).


Furthermore, and this is the most important thing I see so many people conveniently overlooking - (prior to Orlando) the WORST MASS MURDER/SHOOTING in American history (33 killed - Seung Cho, Virginia Tech) was carried out with TWO HANDGUNS, one of which (.22 caliber) was the smallest calliber bullet even made. The other I believe was a .9 mm. The black dude that went looney tunes on his coworkers and killed close to a dozen used a SHOTGUN. Columbine was carried out with SHOTGUNS. There are numerous other examples that can be listed - few and far between is a RIFLE like an AR utilized.


So let's stop with this leftist rubbish that ARs - that the illegalization of AR type RIFLES - will some how take care of this supposed problem.


You see folks, at the end of the day, it's all propaganda left wingers mislead you with to get at handguns and (probably) rifles of many sorts. Don't believe the left-wing MSM bollocks!

 

[Bloodshot Scott]

It was the wild west in those days. You had a musket, the government(military) had a musket. If you wanted a cannon, you could get a cannon. You're pretty much on even ground there. But you have to be pretty delusional to think that you would stand a chance against the United States military. And I'm just talking about our conventional forces (Army, Marines, etc). Good luck taking on the Navy Seals or Delta Force :thumbsup:

This is garbage (as pointed out above). This (erroneous) talking point is to assume that our government citizens will start bombing their own blood...it will not happen, and if it did indeed ever come to that, god damn better believe I better at the very least have a .22, and preferably I would like to have an AR or M4 that I could utilize.

 

[pool_hustler]

So let's stop with this leftist rubbish that ARs - that the illegalization of AR type RIFLES - will some how take care of this supposed problem.

I don't think hardly anybody thinks it will eradicate this problem - only that it might be of some help in certain potential instances.

few and far between is a RIFLE like an AR utilized.

As I understand it an AR or a rifle like an AR was used in San Bernardino, at Umpqua Community College, in a Colorado movie theater, and in Newton Connecticut - that's 4 times in the last 4 years.

 

[Ace Boobtoucher]

Wow, four times in four years?!? That's indicative of something, isn't it? How many "Mass shootings" were carried out with long guns compared to hand guns in the last fifteen years? Rhetorical question. I don't care. The number is insignificant as to be barely interesting except to people wishing to restrict rights.

https://www.americangrit.com/2016/0...SMDSS&utm_medium=Facebook&utm_campaign=ASMDSS

 

[Bloodshot Scott]

I don't think hardly anybody thinks it will eradicate this problem - only that it might be of some help in certain potential instances.

few and far between is a RIFLE like an AR utilized.

As I understand it an AR or a rifle like an AR was used in San Bernardino, at Umpqua Community College, in a Colorado movie theater, and in Newton Connecticut - that's 4 times in the last 4 years.

There are a number of things I'd like to point out with this and don't feel like it right now, but just will say it's very difficult to tool around with a freakin AR - as I said the bloodiest day in American history at the hands of one person was VT and Cho, and he did it with a tiny ass Walther (of which I own the same model) and a Glock 19.


As usual, liberals disingenuous (or just too damn stupid to see the real reality) in their efforts to disarm/control the population. .


(FTR, i think all four of those shooting there were red flags on almost all the perps who carried out all of them - and there are theories that these were, if not all of them, most of them government false flags...just sayin'.)


And I'm not calling you these names specifically, Pool Hustler, just those who are looney tunes bent on gun control - let's at least be honest and transparent what's going on here.

 

[sean miguel]

The government can so outpass you (with drones for instance) that the purpose of the 2nd Amendment is rendered obsolete.

An absurd "point". This is to (erroneously) assume our government people will do such to their own families, neighbors, friends, colleagues...

Just to be clear, that absurd point wasn't mine. I was pointing out that comedian's logic - that because the government can outgun you, then the 2nd amendment as a deterrent no longer applies, which is nonsense. I said before that a bunch of armed citizens would give them pause. Do they really want a bloodbath on their hands? And I was about to make the exact point you made about those in the government turning on their own families, neighbors, and citizens though I'm sure some would as have (see the hole in Vicki Weaver's face). But the majority of those I think would hold true to their oath to defend the Constitution if it came to that.

 

[pool_hustler]

And I'm not calling you these names specifically, Pool Hustler

Appreciate that because I'm a democrat who would never advocate the repeal of the 2nd amendment/a ban on all guns.
I own a couple myself.

and there are theories that these were, if not all of them, most of them government false flags...just sayin'

Yeah but there are ALWAYS those "theories", no matter how illogical. Jade Helm being a perfect example of what was supposedly going to be HUGE one. Cripes even the BP oil spill was theorized to be one Not to mention the legions of loons who think 9/11 was an inside job. Once in a blue moon there's actually some meat to these kind of theories. The rest of the time the conspiracy crowd, even when proven wrong, just unreflectively, unashamedly and compulsively moves on along to the next OMG IT'S A FALSE FLAG scenario, then the next, and the next, ad nauseum...out of a desire to assert their superior sophistication and critical thinking (not), and a desperate need to create some kind of order out of chaos by supposedly being "in the know".

 

[pool_hustler]

Wow, four times in four years?!? That's indicative of something, isn't it?

Ok let's exclude Newton. That would leave 4 times since last October: Orlando, San Bernardino, Umpqua Community College, Colorado movie theater.
I'm not by any means saying it's the predominant method...not at all...I know it's not...but it does appear to be gaining in frequency.

 

[Bloodshot Scott]

Ok let's exclude Newton. That would leave 4 times since last October: Orlando, San Bernardino, Umpqua Community College, Colorado movie theater.
I'm not by any means saying it's the predominant method...not at all...I know it's not...but it does appear to be gaining in frequency.

AR style rifles are scary, I get it. But to assume that they're the real problem in America today - to assume that they're the boogeyman is just shallow silliness, let's get real here.


So 560 (560 dead, a couple thousand shot) were gunned down in Chicago last year alone...how many of those executions were carried out with an AR? I highly suspect few were carried out with the scary AR style rifle.


America can start tackling this "gun problem" (it's deeper and more severe than guns, that is for sure) by giving the felon carrying a gun illegally with an instant 20 YEAR SENTENCE...you can tackle this problem by puting those who commit violent crimes with guns away for a minimum of 20 years...


THAT sort of toughness is how you start to get to the root of the problem, among other efforts...

 

[Bloodshot Scott]

FTR, my friend has a .45 and a .9 and he has several 33 round clips for his weapons...that is some crazy shit. He could do as much and, quite frankly, much more damage with those weapons if he was insane because...they're concealable...it's so easy to carry those weapons around with clips that hold more than the average AR...


Trust me, AR rifles are not the problem here.


One last thing...in the last 20 years gun (and violent) crime in America has dropped significatnly, and gun ownership has gone UP:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-gun-violence-in-the-united-states-heres-why/




Mental illness, glorification of these quacks and these mass shootings/shooters, Hollywood immorality, a government that is weak...THESE are the real cancers and contributors to the insane rise of "mass shootings."

 

[Ace Boobtoucher]

A 33 round "clip?" While I appreciate your earnest belief, learn the correct terminology. "Magazine." A "clip" is vastly different than a magazine. But what difference does magazine size make? I can reload my favorite pistols in about two seconds and I usually carried four spares on duty and four more backups in my load out bag. Never get killed for lack of shooting back.

 

[Straight Shooter]

 

[BCsSecretAlias]

I like gravy.

 

[GodsEmbryo]

I like gravy.

Welcome back fucking noob.