Members conky Posted July 20, 2012 Members Share Posted July 20, 2012 Truth. An AR 15 is serious firepower, and takes less knowledge to convert one to fully auto, than it does to build a fuzz face.SB You can bump fire one without doing any modifications to it and dump an entire 30 round mag in about 2 seconds. The only thing is that {censored} costs a ton of money for ammo, and you're likely to not hit a damn thing by going full auto. And to IRG, lots of states have laws restricting high capacity magazines or pistol grips like on AR15s and AK 47s. California, New Jersey, New York and some others have them in place already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members IRG Posted July 20, 2012 Members Share Posted July 20, 2012 It is a single shot per pull of the trigger. Mag holds 30 rounds. My question is, who the {censored} didn't find it weird that some asshole dressed up like that with all kinds of {censored} bulging up under his coat? I'll be your asshole I guess because I own a Glock, an AR15, and 2 AK47's. I think he snuck in the back door. No one saw him. He came in from the screen. People thought maybe it was a part of the movie, all dressed up in black, smoke...until he started mowing them all down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members V Posted July 20, 2012 Members Share Posted July 20, 2012 I'm sick of people trying to justify their {censored}ing macho desire to be able to shoot at people with a bunch of crap designed to make it sound like they live in a {censored}ing 1700s wilderness. It's the 21st century. Learn to progress from the desires of some long dead politicans. I'm out of this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members crohny Posted July 20, 2012 Members Share Posted July 20, 2012 I choose to live in NY where gun laws are strict. I also do not associate with people other than law enforcement who own hand guns. It's not so much that I think hunting rifles are "oK" as I think they have a legitimate use and purpose for the average citizen and are much less likely to be used in a crime. I still would not let my daughter be at my in-laws without my supervision because my father-in-law is a hunter and has a couple of rifles. You only associate with law enforcement? You realize they are just people as well right? There are more than enough Youtube videos to show police going ape {censored} with their weapons. Keep your kids away from guns, but if they are going to be around them at least have the smarts to teach them basic safety in case they ever do end up holding a gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gambit Posted July 20, 2012 Members Share Posted July 20, 2012 (not directed at anyone here) it seems whenever something like this happens, the constitution is brought up like the holy grail that has to define the laws by which Americans live. it shocks me that people will blindly defend 'the constitution' instead of reasoning that these devastating events could be prevented and/or reduced significantly if everyone didn't think it was a god-given right to own a gun. a machine built for the sole purpose of killing another creature. i admit i don't understand the sacredness of this document, but i can see where change is needed. it's just a shame the majority of the population doesn't call out for stricter (or complete reviews) of the current laws. i don't know what those are either, but the fact that buying a gun appears to be a relatively simple thing to do is bizarre and slightly unnerving. yours sincerely, an admittedly ignorant and saddened-by-mankinds-ability-to-create-their-own-problems, British person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members crohny Posted July 20, 2012 Members Share Posted July 20, 2012 I'm sick of people trying to justify their {censored}ing macho desire to be able to shoot at people with a bunch of crap designed to make it sound like they live in a {censored}ing 1700s wilderness. It's the 21st century. Learn to progress from the desires of some long dead politicans. I'm out of this thread. You're very out of touch with reality. Holy {censored} hahaha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members conky Posted July 20, 2012 Members Share Posted July 20, 2012 I'm just saying, that as well intentioned as you think you are, in this case at least, you would not have succeeded. I wish you could've of course, but this guy was fully protected, even his crotch had protection, lol. He had head protection. Your gun, even if you could have fired off a shot, would not have been effective against him. But his assault rifle, plus the other 3, would have almost entirely done you in, if you had stayed around, trading shots. Do you really think you would have got him had you been there? It's nice to think so, but like I said from the first post, the element of surprise (plus his gear) has all the cards in his favor.BTW, how did he get apprehended? Not sure if I saw anything on it specifically. Sounds like he just went and sat in a car until the police came. Did you not read my response when you asked that earlier? I said if I had been there and that happened the first thing I would have thought about would be to get my family safely out of there. If it came down to him walking towards me with his gun pointed at me, would you rather stand there and watch him kill you, or draw your gun and at least try to stop him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members IRG Posted July 20, 2012 Members Share Posted July 20, 2012 Dude, I am the son of a retired 30 year police officer. I HATED guns up until 3 years ago. Don't try and broad brush me and tell me I don't look at guns in multiple views. I hatred guns after being shot at when I was younger. So you can get {censored}ed. Banning assault rifles does what? Nothing. You still have hand guns that can have 20 plus rounds in a clip and can be fired just as fast as an assault rifle. If you take the time you can get super deadly with a pump action shot gun. You're not solving any problems by taking away assault rifles. Assault rifles arne't used just for killing people. They are great for sport shooting which is done in controlled settings by capable people with a knack for gun safety. If you're going to regulate what can and can't be bought, you're over looking that any gun is just as deadly as the neck. Hunting rifle is just as deadly as an AK. The advantage of a magazine is rather frightening, but if someone really wants to you can be just as deadly with bolt action and pump. Listen asshole, you brushed me with one stroke first, so {censored}ing chill your ass down, for {censored}'s sake. What we should do, is go back to 1776, and go back to the type of arms the framers had at their disposal back then. Single shot muskets that took a minute and a half to reload. I'd be all for that. You could still protect your family, but these massacres would stop. Now how to implement... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members V Posted July 20, 2012 Members Share Posted July 20, 2012 You're very out of touch with reality. Holy {censored} hahaha No, I really am not. You seem to think having no guns will lead to some disaster. Yeah just like the wild land of criminal law that is England and any number of other countries that get by just fine without lead spewing cock substitutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members crohny Posted July 20, 2012 Members Share Posted July 20, 2012 it seems whenever something like this happens, the constitution is brought up like the holy grail that has to define the laws by which Americans live. it shocks me that people will blindly defend 'the constitution' instead of reasoning that these devastating events could be prevented and/or reduced significantly if everyone didn't go think it was a right to own a gun.i admit i don't understand the sacredness of this document, but i can see where change is needed. it's just a shame the majority of the population doesn't call out for stricter (or complete reviews) of the current laws. i don't know what those are either, but the fact that buying a gun appears to be a relatively simple thing to do is bizarre and slightly unnerving. yours sincerely, an admittedly ignorant and saddened-by-mankinds-ability-to-create-their-own-problems, British person. I don't think the constitution is the holy grail but if some criminal is going to have a gun I will use the laws to my benefit to protect myself. If someone ever breaks into your house and shoots and kills your loved ones you might look at this differently. You can;t undo what has happened. Taking away guns from law abiding citizens isn't rational. Look into how many illegal weapons are seized per year. It's alarming. The world isn't perfect and you need to be prepared to deal with the bull{censored}. Sorry I like the option of protecting my loved ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members V Posted July 20, 2012 Members Share Posted July 20, 2012 No good will come of this. Bye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members cryptosonic Posted July 20, 2012 Members Share Posted July 20, 2012 The other day I was speaking with a coworker that happens to be a very devout Christian and the subject of gay marriage and homosexuality in general came up. I gave my standard position, if it isn't hurting anybody I don't really care. She agreed with me somewhat but then got very serious and explained that if US law were to contradict biblical law God would forsake the United States. She doesn't oppose homosexuality per se, her opinion is based on the protection of her eternal soul and the souls of her family. At what point does the gay couple's right to freedom of sexuality end and the right of this lady to protect her soul begin? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members melx Posted July 20, 2012 Members Share Posted July 20, 2012 guns are ok but I prefer mine turtles[video=youtube;DI5_sQ8O-7Y] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members crohny Posted July 20, 2012 Members Share Posted July 20, 2012 No, I really am not. You seem to think having no guns will lead to some disaster. Yeah just like the wild land of criminal law that is England and any number of other countries that get by just fine without lead spewing cock substitutes. That would work, if there weren't THOUSANDS of illegal guns flooding the streets. That is why it wont work here. Hence why you're out of touch with reality. England didn't have the problems we have. Hence why it works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members IRG Posted July 20, 2012 Members Share Posted July 20, 2012 Did you not read my response when you asked that earlier? I said if I had been there and that happened the first thing I would have thought about would be to get my family safely out of there. If it came down to him walking towards me with his gun pointed at me, would you rather stand there and watch him kill you, or draw your gun and at least try to stop him? Yes I saw that, and I believe I agreed with you then. So if you've run away, why would you stop then and have him kill you? I guess I don't get it. I would run as you suggested. I suppose if I got cornered or something, then sure, I would've tried to shoot him in the throat or someplace not protected. Actually probably the best thing would've been to tackle him, and then maybe others would've helped. I think that's how they caught the shooter in Arizona. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members conky Posted July 20, 2012 Members Share Posted July 20, 2012 I'm sick of people trying to justify their {censored}ing macho desire to be able to shoot at people with a bunch of crap designed to make it sound like they live in a {censored}ing 1700s wilderness. It's the 21st century. Learn to progress from the desires of some long dead politicans. I'm out of this thread. I don't think the first person in this thread has stated a desire to shoot anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members V Posted July 20, 2012 Members Share Posted July 20, 2012 The other day I was speaking with a coworker that happens to be a very devout Christian and the subject of gay marriage and homosexuality in general came up. I gave my standard position, if it isn't hurting anybody I don't really care. She agreed with me somewhat but then got very serious and explained that if US law were to contradict biblical law God would forsake the United States. She doesn't oppose homosexuality per se, her opinion is based on the protection of her eternal soul and the souls of her family.At what point does the gay couple's right to freedom of sexuality end and the right of this lady to protect her soul begin? Yeah except this does hurt people. Lots of people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members V Posted July 20, 2012 Members Share Posted July 20, 2012 Ahh, gotcha.I don't think the first person in this thread has stated a desire to shoot anyone. You did. You were like yeah this is why I pack. I would have shot that guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members IRG Posted July 20, 2012 Members Share Posted July 20, 2012 That would work, if there weren't THOUSANDS of illegal guns flooding the streets. That is why it wont work here. Hence why you're out of touch with reality. England didn't have the problems we have. Hence why it works. I actually agree with this, unfortunately. There are just too many guns now. Which makes any type of real gun control, pretty much impossible. Edit, also, I shouldn't have sworn at you (although you started it ) This type of pro gun, anti gun rhetoric sometimes gets the best of me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dZjupp Posted July 20, 2012 Members Share Posted July 20, 2012 guns are bad guns are good let us thank him for our food Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members crohny Posted July 20, 2012 Members Share Posted July 20, 2012 Listen asshole, you brushed me with one stroke first, so {censored}ing chill your ass down, for {censored}'s sake.What we should do, is go back to 1776, and go back to the type of arms the framers had at their disposal back then. Single shot muskets that took a minute and a half to reload. I'd be all for that. You could still protect your family, but these massacres would stop. Now how to implement... I didn't brush you. I read your naive spew that is out of touch with how things are. Your outlook works if things weren't the way they are. This isn't 1776. That {censored} isn't relevant at all. You're stuck on the same out look man. One {censored}ign outlook, and it doesn't involve the big picture. You have to deal with things as they are. Until you reeducate Americans and find a way to do away with poverty stricken areas that breed a good majority of criminals you have to go with the {censored}ing flow. Talking about 1776 does what? Nothing. Guns have evolved. There isn't {censored} that can be done about this because it's already happened. Keep preaching your unrealistic views and I will keep giggling at how out of touch you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members V Posted July 20, 2012 Members Share Posted July 20, 2012 I actually agree with this, unfortunately. There are just too many guns now. Which makes any type of real gun control, pretty much impossible. heres an idea. stop making guns for consumers and stop selling them to people. its a start. people seem to have the misconception that gun ownership deters criminals. it doesn't. law enforcement and economic policy deter crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members conky Posted July 20, 2012 Members Share Posted July 20, 2012 Yes I saw that, and I believe I agreed with you then. So if you've run away, why would you stop then and have him kill you? I guess I don't get it. I would run as you suggested. I suppose if I got cornered or something, then sure, I would've tried to shoot him in the throat or someplace not protected. Actually probably the best thing would've been to tackle him, and then maybe others would've helped. I think that's how they caught the shooter in Arizona. If I got out of there I wouldn't stop to let him shoot me, but if there was no way out and I saw someone coming at me with the intent to kill me, I would pull my gun and try to defend myself. I wouldn't sit there and let it happen without trying to stop it. Sure, I might not get him, but then again, I definitely won't if I don't have something to defend myself with in the first place. There is an article about persuasion vs. force that I read a long time ago that you might find interesting. I'll see if I can find it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members cryptosonic Posted July 20, 2012 Members Share Posted July 20, 2012 Yeah except this does hurt people. Lots of people. So does the ban on gay marriage, and the danger this lady perceives is very real. She actually worries about losing out on eternity with God, some serious mental anguish. Personally as long as there are armies and police in the world, let alone murderers I'd like to keep my options open. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dZjupp Posted July 20, 2012 Members Share Posted July 20, 2012 this threads turnin into an all out Balls to the Wall Brawl! was there ever a saved by the bell episode on guns? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.