Assault Rifle Ban

[MikeyC]

Originally Posted by shilala

While I agree on many "guns are bad, mmkay?" points, most are based on real good guesses as to what might happen.
In all my life I have never heard or seen an assault rifle used in a crime. That's not to say it doesn't happen, but I've only ever seen it in the movies.
I've seen many handguns and shotguns used right here where I live.
So why are they going after the assault weapons instead of the handguns and shotguns?
It's because they know they can't get them. They have to whittle away at it. It's going to take time, and they have to get a foot in the door first.

I'm a firm believer that superior firepower is a deterrent.
If the bad guys have uzi's and I have an uzi, odds are the bad guys might get dead. End of problem.
If the bad guys never come up against equal force, where's it end?
If I have to fight off junkies crawling through my window with a rubber hose (because that's all Mr. Government decides I need) and the junkie is carrying a handgun, odds are that I'm gonna be dead and the junkie is going to crawl through my neighbor's window tomorrow because he has no reason to be afraid.
I don't want to have those odds stacked against me, and I don't want them stacked against you.
That'd suck.

Scott,

I agree with many of the points that you are making. However, I definitely don't agree with all of them. I don't think there's a need to debate this issue to death which is what would likely occur. I think we can just agree to disagree on this one.

Now let's get back to talking about something we can all agree are great . . . CIGARS!!

[Da Klugs]

Originally Posted by AAlmeter

Cram it hippie!

And that's reformed after the era former kinda like hippie to you, killer of bambi via uzi rugged individualist guy!

You prepared for more good samaritan activites this winter? I offered a couple cans of beans to the guy with the "need food god bless sign" the other day. He looked at me like I was insulting his mom and said.. I dont want that! Don't you have any money?

[shilala]

Originally Posted by MikeyC

Scott,

I agree with many of the points that you are making. However, I definitely don't agree with all of them. I don't think there's a need to debate this issue to death which is what would likely occur. I think we can just agree to disagree on this one.

Now let's get back to talking about something we can all agree are great . . . CIGARS!!

You got it, my brother.

Originally Posted by Da Klugs

And that's reformed after the era former kinda like hippie to you, killer of bambi via uzi rugged individualist guy!

You prepared for more good samaritan activites this winter? I offered a couple cans of beans to the guy with the "need food god bless sign" the other day. He looked at me like I was insulting his mom and said.. I dont want that! Don't you have any money?

I to have offered a guy food when he had a sign saying he was hungry only to get the same reaction. HOWEVER, Sunday Alina and I had to run into the clown hamburger joint for a fast bite before a hockey game. There was a guy that held the door for my wife and ask if we had any money for a meal. I said no, thanked him for holding the door and went in. We then bought him a meal and handed it to him on the way out. The smile on his face and the genuine thank you that came from that man convinced me to always at least make the offer. One, might really be hungry and be truly thankful for you taking the time.

Sorry for the thread jack.

I now return you to guns or no guns..

[M1903A1]

Originally Posted by MikeyC

However, I think everyone can agree that if drugs, machine guns, or even Cuban cigars were legal they would be more prevalent and easier to obtain.

Just (or 7/8 of a cent after taxes and inflation)...machine guns are legal to own provided the gun was registered prior to 1986, the owner has a Class 3-accomodating permit from the BATFE, and pays the $200 transfer tax on purchase. It's been that way since 1934.

And registered legal machine guns have always been a rich man's toy...they have been described as an expensive tool for converting money into noise. (Yes, Dave, there is a hobby more expensive than aged CC's!)

Originally Posted by VirtualSmitty

A thread lighting up the radar screen and i'm not the cause of it? I must be losing my touch

Anywho, bans are silly (though I do support the ban on fully automatic weapons).

Fully automatic weapons are not banned. They only require a special license. The 1934 National Firearms Act just made it very difficult to own them. Many people can and do own them.

The way I see it, I NEED enough weapons and ammo of sufficient power to supply myself and anyone else around me who NEEDS one, for whatever reason, for an indefinite amount of time. I will be the one who defines "NEED" for me.

Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.

edit: oops, that's what I get for being called away in the middle of writing a post.

[Ashcan Bill]

Originally Posted by Tombstone

What does everyone think about the inevitable assault rifle ban. After this ban is passed do you think that there will be a slippery slope in regards to banning all firearms?

As far as the original post, I see:

2009-2010 - Congress starts passing gun bans again.

2011 - Congress has a new look as a result of the 2010 elections.

They seem to have a very steep learning curve.

[M1903A1]

Originally Posted by Ashcan Bill

As far as the original post, I see:

2009-2010 - Congress starts passing gun bans again.

2011 - Congress has a new look as a result of the 2010 elections.

They seem to have a very steep learning curve.

Reminds me of something I read in a political mag years ago. In essence:

Gun control grants temporary points, but earns permanent enemies.

[AAlmeter]

Originally Posted by Da Klugs

And that's reformed after the era former kinda like hippie to you, killer of bambi via uzi rugged individualist guy!

You prepared for more good samaritan activites this winter? I offered a couple cans of beans to the guy with the "need food god bless sign" the other day. He looked at me like I was insulting his mom and said.. I dont want that! Don't you have any money?

I can honestly say I've never killed a damn thing with any of my guns. Closest I've come is to make a mess of some beer cans I've already killed with my gullet. I'm a very odd guy (like you haven't noticed). Its the running joke that I could kill a grizzly nocking a choir boy's candle in my bow, but there won't be a chipmunk in sight when I have a gun in my hand.

I do like the rugged individualist thing though. You gotta tell my girlfriend about that. Maybe she'll think I'm one of those bad ass Davey Crockett types and...well...you know what I'm after.

And I'm always willing and hopefully always able to help anyone who needs it. But needing help is one thing....wanting it is a different.

[BamBam]

Originally Posted by webjunkie

I am from the south, North Carolina to be exact. Yamamoto's point was about the amount of opposition that they would have faced in an invasion. He was trying to get the Tojo, and the other Imperial Army commanders to see reason when they were planning an attack on the US. The Navy knew that they would lose a protracted war with the US, the main reason being that they were running out of oil and scrap metal (which they had previously gotten from the US). The Army was for a war with the US because they wanted to try to break the US's support of China in the Second Sino-Japanese War (this is why the US had a trade embargo with Japan in the first place). The Army had cultivated a culture of believing that the Japanese infantry was superior to all and would be able to defeat anything because they had superior will and spirit. They would not have cared about the number of guns in the US.

Until that first step onto the mainland

All I have to say is "IF YOU OUTLAW GUNS, ONLY OUTLAWS WILL HAVE GUNS"

This is more than just a cliche saying. If you start banning guns then the majority of God fearin, law abidin Americans will abide. Then the criminals know that they are the only ones who are armed. Think that might affect the crime rate a touch, and I'm talkin violent crimes here.

I also agree that Americans being free to own guns is a definite deterrent to any invasions from other countries.

An armed society is a polite society.

[webjunkie]

Originally Posted by BamBam

Until that first step onto the mainland

To be fair, they said they would whip the Russians until they ran into the Russians' tanks and artillery.

[houdini]

Two words come to mind in today's political and economic climate regarding the 2nd Amendment: STOCK UP.

[BamBam]

Originally Posted by webjunkie

To be fair, they said they would whip the Russians until they ran into the Russians' tanks and artillery.

Bro, I wish you were closer because we would have an awesome History Herf. I love History, especially war history

[houdini]

Originally Posted by spooble

The 2nd amendment guarantees a right... it doesn't address a need. There is a distinct difference.

Best qoute of this thread!

[webjunkie]

Originally Posted by BamBam

Bro, I wish you were closer because we would have an awesome History Herf. I love History, especially war history

Oh man, a History Herf would be awesome. Nothing better than history nuts hashing it out, especially when alcohol is involved. Even better when it's alcohol and cigars.

[Mikhail]

(puts on flame suite)

I'm a student getting his GED and wants to get into the gun business. so for me to make a retirement I must support the 2'nd amendment and all it stands for.

Most people of my age group have lost sight of what this amendment was put in place to do in my opinion, that is to enforce the checks and balance system.

This is one of my favourite US history quotes by Thomas Jefferson.
(1743-1826), US Founding Father, drafted the Declaration of Independence, 3rd US President)

"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion.
The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is
wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts
they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions,
it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. ...
And what country can preserve its liberties, if it's rulers are not
warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of
resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as
to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost
in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from
time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
It is its natural manure."


This post was done with homework.

(takes suite off)

Owning a rifle or handgun is a fundamental right but not sure what is right about owning an assault rifle? If you agree with an automatic weapon then where is the line? RPG's, grenades, etc.? I seriously doubt they will ever outlaw the guns but as was said, ammunitions will be targeted. Sheesh,,,I need my own island!

I can't sleep so I might as well chime in.

I think the 2nd is pretty simple, it's no if ands or buts. I know some people like to argue well advancements in power have changed that, but back then it was musket to musket. If the gov pulled something that caused a revolt it was a fair match.

Now, pretend tomorrow something that bad goes down, you got your Rem 700 from wal mart vs a F22? Yea, not a fair fight.

I think the founding fathers saw how great ideas even their own were not perfect and if they were wrong with the idea of a democratic republic, the people can fix that if it gets that nasty.

I know things have changed so much by then and I think a ICBM is still a bit much to compete against and the cost kinda keeps it out of the hands of well anyone.

I think it was a way to keep the government in check and through changes in technology culture etc that right has been whittled away.

I think instead of the government spending so much time and effort trying to keep themselves safe from us, how about run well you'd have nothing to feel if so many of us didn't feel trampled on.

I think we all know or can find out about the CA 50 cal ban. They admit it's not been used in a crime ever but still a no no. So what good does that too? Where do you want to draw that line? Why even draw a line? Should we out law the common cold, it's killed a lot of people this year.

I'm trying to expand on the short sightedness of gun bans as you've seen in countries that have had them. Let's pretend, you ban all guns and magically they are gone not even crooks can get them. Now Joe thief comes with a ninja sword, out law them, then he's there with a base ball bat....

Please forgive me if this is a ramble but It's 0320 and I can't sleep lol.

[elderboy02]

Just for the people that didn't know... the Supreme Court of the United States ruled this summer that the 2nd Amendment GUARANTEES an individual right to posess a firearm.

[Starchild]

Originally Posted by Cigary

Owning a rifle or handgun is a fundamental right but not sure what is right about owning an assault rifle? If you agree with an automatic weapon then where is the line? RPG's, grenades, etc.? I seriously doubt they will ever outlaw the guns but as was said, ammunitions will be targeted. Sheesh,,,I need my own island!

This a major misconception on the "Assault" weapons issue. We are not talking about automatic weapons. Those are illegal for all but a few specially licensed people. What we are talking about is semi-automatic weapons that LOOK like their automatic brethren. If you read the definition of "assault" weapon that was used in the previous ban, the only difference between a hunting rifle and an "assault" weapon is how it looks (i.e. two or more features including grip, stock, etc.) and the capacity of the magazine. They function the same as a semi-automatic hunting rifle. The term assault weapon is very subjective and many people believe that it refers to full automatic "machine guns". It does not. Those are already very heavily regulated.

With that clarification, I am totally against the talked about ban. I don't feel the need to own one, but I should have the right if I so choose.