Jump to content
1911fan

Do you support gun control?

Recommended Posts

Nope not at all.

 

Doesn't matter if you have 1 round or 100 rounds, you can still do damage. And why should someone be able to tell you how many rounds you can put into your rifles? Have these people ever been to competition shooting matches?

 

To me gun control mean putting all rounds where I want them....... right in the X ring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope, they shouldnt ban high capacity magazines nor guns. Inocent people who want them should be able to have them. I don't think the goverment gets it, if somebody wants a gun for something bad, legal or illegal their probably going to get it no matter the cost. So banning guns isnt going to change anything, except take them away from inocent people who wont do bad things with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gun control won't deter crazies from carrying out their misdeeds nor will it "slow them down" enough that LE can catch up unfortunately.

They will not suddenly change their ways and seek help just because it got harder for them to get a gun; they will likely instead find another means to kill/maim a lot of people quickly and easily. There are tons of ways to do that without using guns and it has tragically happened here (USA) and abroad. Just focusing on guns to curtail violence does nothing since it does nothing to change the thinking of crazies planning to commit violent acts.

 

There are a lot of things that contribute to the formation of a crazy person and their decision to plan/carry out an active shooter scenario or any other such scenario. Let's talk about mental health, education, social support, home environment, etc and how it relates to violence.

 

I do however feel that gun control makes the average citizen a juicier target for exploitation by criminals and other unsavory people who know their targets are less likely to be armed due to stricter gun laws.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gun control won't deter crazies from carrying out their misdeeds nor will it "slow them down" enough that LE can catch up unfortunately.

They will not suddenly change their ways and seek help just because it got harder for them to get a gun; they will likely instead find another means to kill/maim a lot of people quickly and easily. There are tons of ways to do that without using guns and it has tragically happened here (USA) and abroad. Just focusing on guns to curtail violence does nothing since it does nothing to change the thinking of crazies planning to commit violent acts.

 

There are a lot of things that contribute to the formation of a crazy person and their decision to plan/carry out an active shooter scenario or any other such scenario. Let's talk about mental health, education, social support, home environment, etc and how it relates to violence.

 

I do however feel that gun control makes the average citizen a juicier target for exploitation by criminals and other unsavory people who know their targets are less likely to be armed due to stricter gun laws.

 

 

^THIS. And bans on high-capacity mags just means criminals changing out a magazine a few more times while committing a shooting. It CLEARLY doesn't work in California and New York, considering they have such high crime rates in spite of the Brady Campaign giving them some of the highest grades on gun-control. And tyrannies LOVE disarmed populaces. How do you think Hitler was able to round up and kill all those poor folks in the Holocaust so easily? Answer: lack of armed resistance. Or at least they weren't armed in anything that could repel SS soldiers with submachine guns, handguns, and rifles. Stalin had the same thing, and murdered 17 million of his people in purges. Mao is estimated to have massacred 40-60 million. And again: all were unarmed civilians against armed men in uniform.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And besides they cant take away guns that have already been bought. There is like 2 guns per person. So taking away guns from people who have bought them is a fantasy.

 

You also can't get rid of high capacity magazines. These things have been mass produced for decades. There are literally millions upon millions of the damn things.

 

Ultimately Charles Whitman did a lot of damage with just bolt action rifles and a good shooting position. All guns are dangerous, and they need to be in the hands of responsible owners, but reactive gun control legislation won't prevent crime, or mass murders like we've seen time and time again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Correct me if I'm wrong, but...

 

10+ round magazines are generally standard capacity magazines, unless you're talking about drum/box/extended magazines.

 

The 10-round crap we're forced to use in CA, NY, and elsewhere is reduced capacity.

 

30 round magazines are technically factory standard, I would think. When we call them "high capacity mags" we're really doing ourselves a disservice. Same as calling a bushmaster ar15 an assault rifle, or assault weapon. They're scary words designed to rile up the ignorant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And besides they cant take away guns that have already been bought. There is like 2 guns per person. So taking away guns from people who have bought them is a fantasy.

 

This is not true if any of the current AWB proposals pass congress, Any "grandfathered" AWB defined firearm will be re-classified as a NFA firearm is is subject to many, many more regulations but the nail biter is that NFA firearms are non-transferable in death. This means that technically after 2-3 generations basically all NFA firearms will be confiscated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do some searching and you will find many MANY more examples of armed citizens that have STOPPED the crazies with weapons. But you wont hear that in the news because it doesn't go well with the "view the news is trying to protray". Weapons in the hands of LEGAL civilians, and PROPERLY OBTAINED weapons are far better than trying to take them away from LAW ABIDING CITIZENS.

 

All of this crap the media and these bozo law makers are trying to pass off as fact, simply isn't true. Heck more people are killed by drunk drivers than anything, but we still are allowed booze and cars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nope not at all.

 

Doesn't matter if you have 1 round or 100 rounds, you can still do damage. And why should someone be able to tell you how many rounds you can put into your rifles? Have these people ever been to competition shooting matches?

 

To me gun control mean putting all rounds where I want them....... right in the X ring.

 

Relating to that, there have been crimes in countries that ban guns altogether committed with a crossbow. And you can actually make a repeating crossbow, believe it or not. So I don't think its guns that are the problem. Its the people behind some of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

woogie, if you ever take the time to read yahoo news, there is an atrocious rise in gun violence news post following the sandy hook shooting. Plus the term "assault rifle" is so loosely thrown around. First it was "semi automatic rifle", then "assault weapon" and now "assault rifle".

 

The media also claims that most of the damage was used with the bushmaster AR, but thats not true. I remember reading in the original post from friday of the shooting that he killed everyone with a pistol, and the AR was found in his trunk. Now they are twisting the story to make it seem like all the damage was done by an AR.

 

Also, does anyone remember there was TWO shooters? not just Lanza? He was the one who killed himself, the other ran away. Now everyone is focusing the attention on Lanza.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, the logistics of this argument mean little to nothing in the end. The moment the government attempts to try anything that abridges the Second Amendment any further than the Clinton FAWB, activists/lobbyists of not just gun rights will go up in arms, but the proletariat as well.

 

In the end, I don't care if you do or don't want guns to be regulated, and I feel no need to add my own opinion; but I can say I stand for the rights granted to us by our constitution. Beyond that though, infringing upon these would also be trampling on the Declaration of Independence, where we are guaranteed life, liberty and property/security of person/pursuit of happiness.

 

Enough ranting about old documents... Gun control is unrealistic and absurd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly think that these proposed bans are retarded. They think that limiting firearm purchases will stop acts of violence. When was it that the college professor was shot in the head with a compound bow? Just a bit ago if I'm correct. It's irony at it's finest. In World War II, the Japanese said they wouldn't attack the American mainland because almost every civilian was armed, be it with a hunting rife, a handgun, whatever. This is just opening a spot for everyone to take free shots at us.

 

And the worst part is, the ban effects too many firearms. A Ruger 10/22 is just a .22 rifle, but it is semi-automatic, can have a black stock, and you can get 30 round banana mags for it. IT'S AN ASSAULT RIFLE WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE!!!! That is their thoughts.

 

So no, I do not think that they should ban certain weapons for there history in war or their appearances.

 

 

They should just do better backround checks, including testing one's mental health.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So no, I do not think that they should ban certain weapons for there history in war or their appearances.

 

 

They should just do better backround checks, including testing one's mental health.

 

See, and the REAL irony here is that Lanza WAS rejected from buying a gun due to a background check. So what'd he do? Kill his mom and then steal her guns. Not playing devil's advocate, just pointing out that criminals and the criminally-deranged will circumvent the law regardless of what it says.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10-big-killers.jpg

 

I don't think mush else needs to be said. The focus is obviously in the wrong areas. Regardless of what happends, two things will always be true:

1) Criminals, believe it or not, do NOT follow the rules.

2) Guns will ALWAYS be available, even if they are completely banned. There are 270 million firearms (not including the millions owned by gangs, drug cartels, etc) owned in the US. Anyone who thinks that banning or restricting them will make them magically go away and not be used in crimes is just kidding themselves.

Edited by gundown64

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I honestly feel that airsoft is a good replacement for a real gun. Most of the people buying AR15's are doing it for fantasy reasons.

 

Airsoft is airsoft and real guns are real guns. One does not replace the other. As for people's reasons- as long as they are staying within the law it's no body's business.

 

I don't have an AR, but I do have something similar. I bought it right after a white supremacist shot up a Sikh temple. I'm Jewish, so the idea that some nutball might be gunning for me is not so farfetched. Since some of those wackos think they're already fighting a war against ZOG they're not going to follow hate crime laws or any other kind of laws. So I'd kind of like to have a good semi-auto that takes 30 rounders, "Just in case." I'm not planning for that, and I'm certainly not hoping for it. In the meantime it's a FUN gun to shoot and during warmer months my range runs tactical shoots that are a great experience. (It's nice to know that with my heart rate and adrenaline going I can still hit accurately- thanks airsoft!)

 

Here's my thing with gun control laws- they do not provide real safety. They provide the illusion of safety. Do more guns make us safer? Maybe. Do less? Maybe. Numbers don't lie, but liars use numbers. On both sides. Real answers to violent crime- education, jobs, curing drug addiction, community policing, etc. all take years if not decades for people to see any real change. Quick fixes don't work and tend to create more problems for later. But as long as someone can get reelected for appearing "Tough on crime," they don't care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
See, and the REAL irony here is that Lanza WAS rejected from buying a gun due to a background check. So what'd he do? Kill his mom and then steal her guns. Not playing devil's advocate, just pointing out that criminals and the criminally-deranged will circumvent the law regardless of what it says.

 

I read that, as well as when they said he used an AR even though it was in his trunk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You do realize that Yahoo is not the best source for news information right ;)

 

There are far more crimes committed by other things, and not all just guns, look above.

 

Heck speeding is illegal, murder is illegal, stealing is illegal....but yet these laws are still being broken. And yet the media wont talk about those, or the responsibility of the person and not an object. It is just another way to drive people apart, and be able to control them even more. Look at the news and other sources and you can already see the president, vice and others calling out gun owners and trying to show us as the "bad guys".

 

Things are going to change and happen in the next few years. Just get ready for one heck of a fight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You do realize that Yahoo is not the best source for news information right ;)

 

There are far more crimes committed by other things, and not all just guns, look above.

 

Heck speeding is illegal, murder is illegal, stealing is illegal....but yet these laws are still being broken. And yet the media wont talk about those, or the responsibility of the person and not an object. It is just another way to drive people apart, and be able to control them even more. Look at the news and other sources and you can already see the president, vice and others calling out gun owners and trying to show us as the "bad guys".

 

Things are going to change and happen in the next few years. Just get ready for one heck of a fight.

 

I hope you weren't aiming that first part at me, cuz I haven't been on Yahoo since... Ever :a-laugh:

 

But yeah, things will happen pretty soon. If you look online, most gun sites are selling out of almost everything. You can't even find a Bren for less than $700 now I think.

 

 

I have words of wisdom. Guns don't kill people. People kill people. You can kill someone with a bat or a car, but nobody's stopping you from driving to the ball game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No coyote not at you.

 

People are just trying to get things done because peoples wounds are still sore, and are playing off of emotions.

 

Don't I feel loved... But yeah, that's definitely true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just LOVE how Connecticut is trying to ban all guns and mags with an ammo-capacity greater than 1 round thinking it'll stop mass-shootings. In the days of flint-locks and swords, pirates (REAL pirates, not the MP3-stealing lot) would board ships with four or more flintlock pistols tied to their belt and suspenders with short strings of rope and would pop off multiple shots at several targets with devastating results due to their victims only having one shot available. And apparently Cuomo is working on INTENSIFYING New York's already strict gun laws, one such measure being to ban mags and guns with ammo-capacity exceeding SEVEN rounds.

 

 

On a less grave note: anyone else ever heard of the Dardick Gun? Neat concept that would no doubt scare gun-control advocates today.

 

dardickgun.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I just LOVE how Connecticut is trying to ban all guns and mags with an ammo-capacity greater than 1 round thinking it'll stop mass-shootings. In the days of flint-locks and swords, pirates (REAL pirates, not the MP3-stealing lot) would board ships with four or more flintlock pistols tied to their belt and suspenders with short strings of rope and would pop off multiple shots at several targets with devastating results due to their victims only having one shot available. And apparently Cuomo is working on INTENSIFYING New York's already strict gun laws, one such measure being to ban mags and guns with ammo-capacity exceeding SEVEN rounds.

 

 

On a less grave note: anyone else ever heard of the Dardick Gun? Neat concept that would no doubt scare gun-control advocates today.

 

dardickgun.jpg

 

OMG IT IS A WEAPON DESIGNED FOR MURDER!!!

 

Actually that's a pretty awesome little gun...

 

Here in Maryland it's already strict, but now they are making you get a fingerprint for EVERY firearm you buy. So now people have resorted to flipping rifles. Somebody was selling Arisaka rifles for $99 and a guy bought two and flipped them for 200. It's sad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gun ban is a joke. Gun control is for a clown who wanna force people in his show and force them to applause for him. I can still get guns if they ban it. Go to the ghetto hood and buy those stolen guns from gang member or theif for $250 for a stolen pistaol, $300 for a sub machine gun and $450 for semi auto rifle. If they ban guns the price of stolen gun can go up about +$150 to $300 bucks . If the guy is cool he will give you the gun and ammo if not you will get jack and rob maybe kill .. haha Gotta know how to deal with them..

Gun is not a problem. the problem is the people. Same as airsoft gun, what kind of stupid idiot :censored2: retarded kid point an airsoft gun at police officer without thinking that he will not get shot at ? See stupid people need to die so the earth can be a better place. Like those liberal, they think they are so smart and wanted other to be like them.. They think evil doesn't exist in this world... You want to see evil? Come to a murder sence ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
woogie, if you ever take the time to read yahoo news, there is an atrocious rise in gun violence news post following the sandy hook shooting. Plus the term "assault rifle" is so loosely thrown around. First it was "semi automatic rifle", then "assault weapon" and now "assault rifle".

 

The media also claims that most of the damage was used with the bushmaster AR, but thats not true. I remember reading in the original post from friday of the shooting that he killed everyone with a pistol, and the AR was found in his trunk. Now they are twisting the story to make it seem like all the damage was done by an AR.

 

Also, does anyone remember there was TWO shooters? not just Lanza? He was the one who killed himself, the other ran away. Now everyone is focusing the attention on Lanza.

 

There's a whole lot of controversy about the Sandy Hook shooting now, because a lot of things don't seem to "match up." For example, the Chief Medical Examiner said himself during the interview that the victims were shot by rounds from the rifle, not the pistol. But if the rifle was in the car how is this possible? In addition, there is evidence of some "donation/memorial" pages (facebook/etc.) being made a day or two in advance and that there was a scheduled FEMA drill at a hospital 20 mins away from the school, with the "goal" of that situation to tend to children in distress "in crisis situations" or something like that. This drill was publicly scheduled on the Connecticut gov's site, but not sure if they removed it now or not. Not going any deeper into this, there are MANY things that don't logically make sense or raise a few questions.

 

From 4:25 on, he will say that the primary weapon was the rifle.

 

But on the case of gun control. No. Just no. People need to get out of the mindset that guns are violent/dangerous. Yes, they have potential. But the people behind the guns are the ones doing the action, the guns are inanimate until taken in control by people not properly fit to yield a weapon.

Edited by SJ408

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's a whole lot of controversy about the Sandy Hook shooting now, because a lot of things don't seem to "match up." For example, the Chief Medical Examiner said himself during the interview that the victims were shot by rounds from the rifle, not the pistol. But if the rifle was in the car how is this possible? In addition, there is evidence of some "donation/memorial" pages (facebook/etc.) being made a day or two in advance and that there was a scheduled FEMA drill at a hospital 20 mins away from the school, with the "goal" of that situation to tend to children in distress "in crisis situations" or something like that. This drill was publicly scheduled on the Connecticut gov's site, but not sure if they removed it now or not. Not going any deeper into this, there are MANY things that don't logically make sense or raise a few questions.

 

From 4:25 on, he will say that the primary weapon was the rifle.

 

But on the case of gun control. No. Just no. People need to get out of the mindset that guns are violent/dangerous. Yes, they have potential. But the people behind the guns are the ones doing the action, the guns are inanimate until taken in control by people not properly fit to yield a weapon.

 

Exactly, things are just confusing and sad. And did you see the New York gun laws they have on place now? Your firearm cannot hold more than seven rounds, must be re-registered, and they will take away family heirlooms if it does not meet their criteria. The mayor of NY said he will try to disarm America or something of the sort. He won't be re-elected after that...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Exactly, things are just confusing and sad. And did you see the New York gun laws they have on place now? Your firearm cannot hold more than seven rounds, must be re-registered, and they will take away family heirlooms if it does not meet their criteria. The mayor of NY said he will try to disarm America or something of the sort. He won't be re-elected after that...

 

It's a sad day in America when the M1 Garand is banned ANYWHERE. I mean, bad enough California banned M1 Carbines...

 

And I hope Bloomberg gets the boot come next election cycle. I can't see there being too many people with a 'D' next to their names being around should any more laws (federal or state) be passed. I'm not worried about GA going the way of NY, though Atlanta's mayor Kasim Reed might just do it (the guy's a nut to begin with).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's a sad day in America when the M1 Garand is banned ANYWHERE. I mean, bad enough California banned M1 Carbines...

 

And I hope Bloomberg gets the boot come next election cycle. I can't see there being too many people with a 'D' next to their names being around should any more laws (federal or state) be passed. I'm not worried about GA going the way of NY, though Atlanta's mayor Kasim Reed might just do it (the guy's a nut to begin with).

 

Well I'm going to buy an M1 Carbine right quick. But yeah, nobody likes Bloomberg anymore. Except those weird vegan hippies who hate everything dangerous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's a sad day in America when the M1 Garand is banned ANYWHERE. I mean, bad enough California banned M1 Carbines...

 

I was really hoping to get my hands on a M1 Garand because it really is probably my favorite gun of all time. These people deciding what the rest of the people can/can't do really need to factor in the reality of things and not just the short term "my rule only" jurisdiction.

 

I wonder... These politicians/anti-gun/etc. people need to try out airsoft. lol As funny as it sounds, I'm serious. Then atleast they'll learn that a majority of "gun yielders" (airsofters included) actually are disciplined with their rifle, real steel or airsoft, and we follow our own set of "strict" rules at the fields/facilities that we play at; even more so with real steel. Again, they needa shift focus from the guns to the people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guns should be sold like a driver license. Take a test, get some practice, here is your gun. Will this stop WHOEVER grabs or steals a gun, nope! But at least it will shut the moms up for now. (not trying to be a :censored2:)

 

Well you are supposed to take a gun safety course before you buy a firearm. But they do give you backround checks when you buy a rifle. It's a little more complex with a handgun though, you need to be 21, have a clean sheet, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Check with local and federal laws regarding firearms purchases. I did not have to provide proof that I took a gun safety class, or any training at all when I purchased my firearms. For my handgun I had to take a simple 5 minute gun safety/use written exam administered at the store to get my card and continue with my handgun purchasing endeavors. That was California before recent events.

 

I would not mind taking more exams and shooting xyz standards to demonstrate competency if it meant I could legally purchase regular capacity mags, carry, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Check with local and federal laws regarding firearms purchases. I did not have to provide proof that I took a gun safety class, or any training at all when I purchased my firearms. For my handgun I had to take a simple 5 minute gun safety/use written exam administered at the store to get my card and continue with my handgun purchasing endeavors. That was California before recent events.

 

I would not mind taking more exams and shooting xyz standards to demonstrate competency if it meant I could legally purchase regular capacity mags, carry, etc.

 

Yeah, it all depends on where you live.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're in Maryland you know that there are gun bans going on, and people do not like them. I went to Annapolis today and stood at the protest. The NRA had petitions getting signed on "Assault Clipboard" :a-laugh:

 

Anyway, what do people think about the whole "GUNS ARE BAD THEY KILL PEOPLE TAKE THEM AWAY" crap? I find it ignorant, just wondering what others think of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you're in Maryland you know that there are gun bans going on, and people do not like them. I went to Annapolis today and stood at the protest. The NRA had petitions getting signed on "Assault Clipboard" :a-laugh:

 

Anyway, what do people think about the whole "GUNS ARE BAD THEY KILL PEOPLE TAKE THEM AWAY" crap? I find it ignorant, just wondering what others think of it.

It is another form of political BS and them wanting to limit our freedoms. Most liberals have tried to ban assault weapons before but it did not happen. Now its making a comeback and a few months ago Obama announced he would bypass congress to do it. Its a leader we have in office who is a communist, wants to hurt our country, and is power hungry. Thats why he bypasses congress(the chack and ballance part of our syestem) to do whatever the hell he wants and have total control. Heck, Obama gives U.S. tanks and fighter jets to our enemies who call us pigs and infedels! He supplies our enemies with weapons, and hurts our country. H eloves our enemies, not our allies. Why doesnt he give those jets and tanks to Isrial or Tiwan??? THey are our allies and need those weapons to defend themselves!! But no, he gives the weapons to enemies who want to harm them.

 

The liberal media uses school shootings to justify and make an excuse for these actions. The shooting in December at the school they use as an excuse. Only thing is, the kid tried to get a gun but could not buy one because of a background check, and his mother was dumb enough to leave guns around the house without locking them up, so a mentally unstable kid got them.

 

Gun bans only hurt the law abiding citizens, not help. If people are getting guns illegally, what makes the liberals think they care about the gun laws??? They are already getting them illegally from a black market sale far from their control. So now, law abiding citizens do not firearms to protect themselves against non-law abiding people who do not follow up on gun laws anyway. It only hurts law abiding citizens.

 

In my opinion, Obama knows he is a power hungry dictator and wants to get rid our guns because he knows we could revolt and stop his power hungry dictatorship. But that's just my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole "guns are bad" "assault rifles" etc is the governments way of scaring the uneducated citizens into agreeing to give up their 2nd amendment rights. If you don't believe me, take some time to actually look into the Newtown shooting. It is scary just how many inconsistencies there are in the official story.

 

The government should be afraid of the people, not the other way around. Unfortunately because for the time being, the government is afraid of the people, they will try to do what they have to so that they aren't afraid. Once they take away our guns, they really have nothing to fear, because we have no way of stopping them.

 

What really saddens me is that too many Americans are drinking the proverbial Cool Aid and are more than happy to surrender their rights. Eventually they are going to wish they didn't. Apparently the "shall not be infringed" statement in the 2nd Amendment doesn't mean jack squat. Who would have known. :a-rolleyes:

Edited by airborne101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...