Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Washington state liberals (democrats) want to stop by and inspect your house from time to time. Evil gun search


  • Please log in to reply
101 replies to this topic

#91 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • ALL-PRO
  • 23,774 posts

Posted 21 February 2013 - 08:29 PM

That is the most retarded thing I have heard lately.


It's one of the best places to sit and wait for the gun grabbers to come and just try and take your guns, whats the deal do you hate freedom?

#92 NanuqoftheNorth

NanuqoftheNorth

    Frosty Alaskan Amber

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,935 posts
  • LocationAlaska

Posted 22 February 2013 - 08:13 AM

Posted Image Without a doubt, it is highly disappointing that any legislator would not have thoroughly read this bill before sponsoring it. Having said that, at least he owned up to his mistake, plus we all know there was never any chance of the bill passing in its original form. Meanwhile Indiana state level Republicans intend to require medically unnecessary double trans-vaginal probes of women seeking first trimester abortions. Here we have, tea party GOP outrage of a bill with no chance of passing, but silence on a true invasion of personal privacy, albeit, we are only talking about women's rights here, I know that is hardly worth mentioning in the big scheme of things. Women should just be happy to still have their voting rights after screwing up the last Presidential Election for Romney, amirite? Yet the GOP/TP seems to be eager to mandate double trans-vaginal probes for no medically justifiable reason, but are deathly afraid of anyone looking at their rifles! Wonder what Sigmund Freud would have to say about that? http://www.rawstory....nal-probe-bill/

#93 thefuzz

thefuzz

    coppin a feel

  • ALL-PRO
  • 8,718 posts

Posted 22 February 2013 - 10:22 AM

Well I can't see the picture that well. Is that a Winchester Model 78? If so that has a bolt action I think. Also there is no clip in the picture. The standard magazine clip for those rifles is generally 10. The current idea is to ban clips of over 10 rounds so I don't think that would be in any trouble as long as you don't purchase a clip of over 10 rounds for it. I also don't think it can run off three shot bursts.

Also generally speaking, aren't rifles that use a Remington .308 cartridge usually considered to be more of a sniper rifle than an assault rifle?

Right now there isn't a better plan that is doable and has wide support. I think must of us would like to see a ban or severe regulatory tightening on certain type of handguns as well. But that isn't going to happen because handguns are also the most popular gun for self defense.

The plan that has been put in place is not a magic bullet (no pun intended), but it is common sense things that put us in a better direction even if it is far away from being significant enough.



No bolt action. Semi Auto rifle, just like the AR-15's that are available to the public.

No AR's nor any other rifle available to the public has the capability of having "three round bursts" as you put it.

A .308 is a very popular hunting rifle cartridge, and yes it was used as a main bore size for most snipers for many many years.

Bolded is where I have you ask you what the fug you are talking about....AR-15's are not assault rifles, nor is there a general ammo size for sniper/assault rifles.

Again I will ask you, what do you think is the big difference in these weapons, and where will you draw the line on what is legal and not legal to own?

#94 mmmbeans

mmmbeans

    FBI SURVEILLANCE VAN

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,005 posts

Posted 22 February 2013 - 10:57 AM

huh, i have never seen a number approaching that, i havent seen any 2012 numbers yet didnt know they were available

link?


I can't find it, can't remember where i found it yesterday... disregard the number.

#95 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,921 posts

Posted 22 February 2013 - 02:11 PM

No bolt action. Semi Auto rifle, just like the AR-15's that are available to the public.

No AR's nor any other rifle available to the public has the capability of having "three round bursts" as you put it.
A .308 is a very popular hunting rifle cartridge, and yes it was used as a main bore size for most snipers for many many years.

Bolded is where I have you ask you what the fug you are talking about....AR-15's are not assault rifles, nor is there a general ammo size for sniper/assault rifles.

Again I will ask you, what do you think is the big difference in these weapons, and where will you draw the line on what is legal and not legal to own?


Look. I am not a gun aficionado, I admit that. I have a couple guns that are family heirlooms, and I know how to use them. I don't read Gun & Ammo magazine. This is not a picture of me (as far as you know):

Posted Image

But despite that, as far as I can tell, the only reason an AR-15 is not technically an "assault rifle" is because it doesn't have selective fire. It shares all of the other characteristics of an assault rifle.

But I understand your point, and the term "assault rifle" maybe not the best phrase for these type of weapons. Some people refers to them as "military style weaponry" or use the US legal definition of "assault weapons" which has a different meaning than "assault rifle". But at this point you are arguing semantics when you know what people mean when they say "assault rifle".

Also I believe fully automatic rifles are currently legal, and some automatic rifles have what I think is referred to as "burst fire" which allow maximum bursts of rounds which is usually set at 3.

I am not the one drawing lines on this. If it were up to me, I would ban any semi-automatic rifle. They may be preferable to a bolt action, lever, etc. for hunting, but they are also not necessary for hunting. If that includes your rifle, than I am sorry.

#96 thefuzz

thefuzz

    coppin a feel

  • ALL-PRO
  • 8,718 posts

Posted 22 February 2013 - 02:37 PM

Look. I am not a gun aficionado, I admit that. I have a couple guns that are family heirlooms, and I know how to use them. I don't read Gun & Ammo magazine. This is not a picture of me (as far as you know):

Posted Image

But despite that, as far as I can tell, the only reason an AR-15 is not technically an "assault rifle" is because it doesn't have selective fire. It shares all of the other characteristics of an assault rifle.

But I understand your point, and the term "assault rifle" maybe not the best phrase for these type of weapons. Some people refers to them as "military style weaponry" or use the US legal definition of "assault weapons" which has a different meaning than "assault rifle". But at this point you are arguing semantics when you know what people mean when they say "assault rifle".

Also I believe fully automatic rifles are currently legal, and some automatic rifles have what I think is referred to as "burst fire" which allow maximum bursts of rounds which is usually set at 3.

I am not the one drawing lines on this. If it were up to me, I would ban any semi-automatic rifle. They may be preferable to a bolt action, lever, etc. for hunting, but they are also not necessary for hunting. If that includes your rifle, than I am sorry.


The point of all of this, is just to point out that this is not about saving lives, it's about grabbing guns from everyone. The "left" have been eyeing this for a long time, many would love for us to not have any guns at all, but don't know where to start.

The problem with the "assault weapons" is that it's just the start, next is semi auto, then pumps, then bolt actions, then single shots. It will not stop.

And no, for almost the entire population automatic rifles are illegal.

Also, the only real difference in these two weapons is the looks. I guess folks think that pistol grips and black finishes are extremely dangerous, and turn regular guns into weapons of mass destruction.

#97 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,921 posts

Posted 22 February 2013 - 03:06 PM

The point of all of this, is just to point out that this is not about saving lives, it's about grabbing guns from everyone. The "left" have been eyeing this for a long time, many would love for us to not have any guns at all, but don't know where to start.

The problem with the "assault weapons" is that it's just the start, next is semi auto, then pumps, then bolt actions, then single shots. It will not stop.

And no, for almost the entire population automatic rifles are illegal.

Also, the only real difference in these two weapons is the looks. I guess folks think that pistol grips and black finishes are extremely dangerous, and turn regular guns into weapons of mass destruction.


Automatic guns are not illegal in the US. There might be bans at the state levels, but they are not illegal by federal statute.

And if I understand what you are saying, you are making the argument that out of fear that there is a slippery slope of further gun control sometime in the future we should just do nothing.

Let me ask you this question, how did that slippery slope work out with the ban on certain assault weapons in the 90's?? Have you lost more guns since that ban? Has the government come after pumps or bolt actions since that happened nearly 20 years ago?

The "slippery slope" argument is and always has been, by and large, a complete bullshit fear mongering tactic. Not just in the gun argument, but in most all debates where people warn of the "slippery slopes". Kinda of like the "slippery slope" of gay marriage leading to an epidemic of bestiality and incest.

It is an argument designed to conjure up fear of an unknown.

#98 thefuzz

thefuzz

    coppin a feel

  • ALL-PRO
  • 8,718 posts

Posted 22 February 2013 - 03:26 PM

I'm worried about the slippery slope of the federal government putting a ban on weapons for no reason.

You want to do something about it, fine, and I am totally in agreement with you, but try to fix the real issue, don't just fug around with it because it makes you feel good.

#99 thefuzz

thefuzz

    coppin a feel

  • ALL-PRO
  • 8,718 posts

Posted 22 February 2013 - 03:28 PM

Automatic guns are not illegal in the US. There might be bans at the state levels, but they are not illegal by federal statute.

And if I understand what you are saying, you are making the argument that out of fear that there is a slippery slope of further gun control sometime in the future we should just do nothing.

Let me ask you this question, how did that slippery slope work out with the ban on certain assault weapons in the 90's?? Have you lost more guns since that ban? Has the government come after pumps or bolt actions since that happened nearly 20 years ago?

The "slippery slope" argument is and always has been, by and large, a complete bullshit fear mongering tactic. Not just in the gun argument, but in most all debates where people warn of the "slippery slopes". Kinda of like the "slippery slope" of gay marriage leading to an epidemic of bestiality and incest.

It is an argument designed to conjure up fear of an unknown.



P.S. Do you think this is OK? Or normal?

http://www.carolinah...se-of-firearms/

#100 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,921 posts

Posted 22 February 2013 - 03:54 PM

P.S. Do you think this is OK? Or normal?

http://www.carolinah...se-of-firearms/


I think that is something that has been procedure for a while. It is for veterans that have been deemed mentally or physically deficient.

You shouldn't get so worked up over chain emails and/or news organizations that are less than honest.

I am not sure which this originated from but I am sure it is one or the other.

#101 thefuzz

thefuzz

    coppin a feel

  • ALL-PRO
  • 8,718 posts

Posted 22 February 2013 - 03:58 PM

I think that is something that has been procedure for a while. It is for veterans that have been deemed mentally or physically deficient.

You shouldn't get so worked up over chain emails and/or news organizations that are less than honest.

I am not sure which this originated from but I am sure it is one or the other.


I interpreted that as: Look over there....nothing to see here.....move along.

#102 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,921 posts

Posted 22 February 2013 - 04:21 PM

I interpreted that as: Look over there....nothing to see here.....move along.


Are you talking about my post or the letter? Do you mean we should let mentally damaged people have access to guns?

This has been a part of federal law for a long time. What are you getting at?

Not sure what you are looking for.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com