Gun Owners Buy 14 Million + Guns in 2009. More Than 21 of the Worlds Standing Armies.

[uscitizen]

I wanna .50 cal Barrett for squirell hunting.

btw I own many guns and enjoy shooting them.

 

[slackjawed]

Since gun sales between private citizens is legal in my state, and others without a background check, I bet the total is more.
I bought a few, and sold a few this year myself. But then, they are the tools of my current trade, and that's pretty normal for me to buy and sell a few guns throughout the year.
Earlier in the year I posted something about the fact that I buy ammo in bulk and was waiting for the price to come down a little before buying mine and was instantly accused of treason. I think the price rise in ammo, and the shortage last year was based on fear of more control. When it didn't happen, the price came down and ammo became more available. I was right to wait to buy my ammo as I saved a bunch of money.
Some people can be so dumb about guns.
An armed society is a polite society. Gun control laws simply put guns in criminal hands and remove them from the law-abiding.

 

[Screaming Eagle]

Well, the assault weapons ban was about the stupidest shit ever in the first place. SKS's and AK-47's were assault weapons because they look 'mean', but mini-30's and other guns with similar capabilities are not assault weapons because they look normal. A weapon with 3 after market upgrades like stock, forearm, or muzzlebreak were not legal because more than 2 upgrades makes them look 'mean' even though the functionality of the weapon is unchanged. All this was decided by a group of ladies looking through a gun magazine and picking out the one's that looked 'mean'.

Are you advocating more guns should be added to the ban?

No, I was advocating the lessening of stupidity in our country's laws. I'm glad that the ban was shallow, stupid, and ineffective. It would have been worse if they had done something sensible and classified them according to functionality. Really though, an assault weapons ban makes no sense in any configuration, the only way you can do it is to ban any weapon which is a semi-auto, but then you can still lay down just as much fire with pumps and revolvers, as if it is needed. I don't see the point. These guns have rarely been used in criminal activity, especially where it would matter what kind of gun they had.

 

[Missourian]

I wanna .50 cal Barrett for squirell hunting.

btw I own many guns and enjoy shooting them.

It saves dressin' 'em afterward...just scrape the meat off the surrounding foliage.

 

[uscitizen]

Yeah I like cheaper ammo. I just bought 2200 rounds of ammo last weekend.

 

[Screaming Eagle]

Well, the assault weapons ban was about the stupidest shit ever in the first place. SKS's and AK-47's were assault weapons because they look 'mean', but mini-30's and other guns with similar capabilities are not assault weapons because they look normal. A weapon with 3 after market upgrades like stock, forearm, or muzzlebreak were not legal because more than 2 upgrades makes them look 'mean' even though the functionality of the weapon is unchanged. All this was decided by a group of ladies looking through a gun magazine and picking out the one's that looked 'mean'.

Their must not be any infringement on the rights to purchase any weapon.Guns, rifles, shotguns, Assault Rifles, No limitations or exclusions.
The assault rifle ban is unconstitutional!!, and illegal. Thats why it was given a lifespan of 4 years.!!

I don't really see the difference between an "assault rifle" and a regular semi-auto rifle. What is it the size of the clip?

I think we should be allowed to buy fully auto weapons.

 

[uscitizen]

Well, the assault weapons ban was about the stupidest shit ever in the first place. SKS's and AK-47's were assault weapons because they look 'mean', but mini-30's and other guns with similar capabilities are not assault weapons because they look normal. A weapon with 3 after market upgrades like stock, forearm, or muzzlebreak were not legal because more than 2 upgrades makes them look 'mean' even though the functionality of the weapon is unchanged. All this was decided by a group of ladies looking through a gun magazine and picking out the one's that looked 'mean'.

Their must not be any infringement on the rights to purchase any weapon.Guns, rifles, shotguns, Assault Rifles, No limitations or exclusions.
The assault rifle ban is unconstitutional!!, and illegal. Thats why it was given a lifespan of 4 years.!!

I don't really see the difference between an "assault rifle" and a regular semi-auto rifle. What is it the size of the clip?

I think we should be allowed to buy fully auto weapons.

Only with special training should one be allowed to own fully auto weapons.

Remmeber the kid that shot his brains out at a shooting range with an Uzi? while his father watched?

 

[52ndStreet]

Their must not be any infringement on the rights to purchase any weapon.Guns, rifles, shotguns, Assault Rifles, No limitations or exclusions.
The assault rifle ban is unconstitutional!!, and illegal. Thats why it was given a lifespan of 4 years.!!

I don't really see the difference between an "assault rifle" and a regular semi-auto rifle. What is it the size of the clip?

I think we should be allowed to buy fully auto weapons.

Only with special training should one be allowed to own fully auto weapons.

Remmeber the kid that shot his brains out at a shooting range with an Uzi? while his father watched?

I think they are trying to challenge the Fully auto assault weapon ban in court. It may also be unconstitutional.!

 

[Screaming Eagle]

Their must not be any infringement on the rights to purchase any weapon.Guns, rifles, shotguns, Assault Rifles, No limitations or exclusions.
The assault rifle ban is unconstitutional!!, and illegal. Thats why it was given a lifespan of 4 years.!!

I don't really see the difference between an "assault rifle" and a regular semi-auto rifle. What is it the size of the clip?

I think we should be allowed to buy fully auto weapons.

Only with special training should one be allowed to own fully auto weapons.

Remmeber the kid that shot his brains out at a shooting range with an Uzi? while his father watched?

Why should my rights be restricted because of someone else's incompetence? I know that's a controversial opinion I hold, I just see nothing in the Constitution which limits my ability to own a firearm with certain capabilities. Explosives I am definitely ok with having banned, especially in urban environments where one would be endangering their neighbors.

 

[Missourian]

I don't really see the difference between an "assault rifle" and a regular semi-auto rifle. What is it the size of the clip?

I think we should be allowed to buy fully auto weapons.

Only with special training should one be allowed to own fully auto weapons.

Remmeber the kid that shot his brains out at a shooting range with an Uzi? while his father watched?

I think they are trying to challenge the Fully auto assault weapon ban in court. It may also be unconstitutional.!

Anyone can own a fully automatic weapon, if your willing to jump thru the BATF's hoops. I wrote a post on it recently in the Law forum...I'll see if I can dig it up.

I fully support present U.S. law on the ownership of fully automatic weapons.

 

[uscitizen]

I don't really see the difference between an "assault rifle" and a regular semi-auto rifle. What is it the size of the clip?

I think we should be allowed to buy fully auto weapons.

Only with special training should one be allowed to own fully auto weapons.

Remmeber the kid that shot his brains out at a shooting range with an Uzi? while his father watched?

Why should my rights be restricted because of someone else's incompetence? I know that's a controversial opinion I hold, I just see nothing in the Constitution which limits my ability to own a firearm with certain capabilities. Explosives I am definitely ok with having banned, especially in urban environments where one would be endangering their neighbors.

Becuase of the need to protect others.

Should anyone be allowed to be a DR. with no training?

 

[Missourian]

Here it is:

Automatic weapons are very heavily regulated in the U.S., to the point that they have no bearing on gun crime whatsoever.

To own an automatic weapon in the U.S., you must obtain permission from the ATF, obtain a signature from the county sheriff or city or town chief of police (not necessarily permission), pass an extensive background check to include submitting a photograph and finger prints, fully register the firearm, receive ATF written permission before moving the firearm across state lines, and pay a tax...all in accordance with the National Firearms Act of 1934.

The AK-47 available in the U.S. are NOT military automatic weapons and CANNOT be easily converted to an automatic configuration.​

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Tell me again when Obama said he was going to take away your guns?
All this shows me is a bunch of wacko's who live in fear, felt the need to buy even more guns.

Guess what sweetheart? We have a Constitutional RIGHT to own firearms, we don't need a reason.

You don't say?

Now how about you applaud the President for not trying to put any new laws on the books that infringe on that right?

Why would we do that....that would be like going to sleep for the next 3 years...gotta keep the racket up so he knows not to even think about trying. Those crazy progressives and their anti-gun sentiments need to be watched so they dont even think about trying to restrict or ban our guns. Why do I say that? I'll let others do the talking:

•"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms..." - Richard Henry Lee, 1788, Member of the First U.S. Senate.

•"That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms..." - Samuel Adams, Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, at 86-87 (Peirce & Hale, eds., Boston, 1850. 2, col. 2.

•"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878

•"The right of citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard against the tyranny which now appears remote in America, but which historically has proved to be always possible." - Senator Hubert H. Humprey (D-Minnesota)

•"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest." - Mahatma Ghandi

•"...to disarm the people is the best and most effective way to enslave them..." - George Mason

•"Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?" - Patrick Henry, 3 J. Elliot, Debates in the Several State Conventions 45, 2d Ed. Philadelphia, 1836.

•"The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed and that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of press." - Thomas Jefferson

•"What the subcommittee on the Constitution uncovered was clear -- and long-lost proof that the Second Amendment to our Constitution was intended as an individual right of the American citizen to keep and carry arms in a peaceful manner, for the protection of himself, his family, and his freedom." - Senator Orrin Hatch, Chairman, Subcommittee on the Constitution, Preface, "The Right to Keep and Bear Arms"

•"If gun laws in fact worked, the sponsors of this type of legislation should have no difficulty drawing upon long lists of examples of crime rates reduced by such legislation. That they cannot do so after a century and a half of trying that they must sweep under the rug the southern attempts at gun control in the 1870-1910 period, the northeastern attempts in the 1920-1939 period, and the attempts at both Federal and State levels in 1965-1976 - establishes the repeated, complete, and inevitable failure of gun laws to control crime." -- Senator Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) quoted from "The Right to Keep and Bear Arms, Report of the Senate Subcommittee on the Constitution, Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, February 1982, p. vii."

•"Congress has no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American ...the unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people." - Tench Coxe, 20 Feb 1788


Just sayin

 

[Screaming Eagle]

Only with special training should one be allowed to own fully auto weapons.

Remmeber the kid that shot his brains out at a shooting range with an Uzi? while his father watched?

Why should my rights be restricted because of someone else's incompetence? I know that's a controversial opinion I hold, I just see nothing in the Constitution which limits my ability to own a firearm with certain capabilities. Explosives I am definitely ok with having banned, especially in urban environments where one would be endangering their neighbors.

Becuase of the need to protect others.

Should anyone be allowed to be a DR. with no training?

Because of the need to protect others from what? What the hell are you blathering about?

I do not support the government in endorsing who they feel to be qualified to do anything. Their license issuing and testing and regulating of professionals is a joke. I would much rather go to doctors who were independently approved by a third party group. I don't believe in paying a doctor $150 to get a prescription for something I already know I need.

 

[uscitizen]

Why should my rights be restricted because of someone else's incompetence? I know that's a controversial opinion I hold, I just see nothing in the Constitution which limits my ability to own a firearm with certain capabilities. Explosives I am definitely ok with having banned, especially in urban environments where one would be endangering their neighbors.

Becuase of the need to protect others.

Should anyone be allowed to be a DR. with no training?

Because of the need to protect others from what? What the hell are you blathering about?

I do not support the government in endorsing who they feel to be qualified to do anything. Their license issuing and testing and regulating of professionals is a joke. I would much rather go to doctors who were independently approved by a third party group. I don't believe in paying a doctor $150 to get a prescription for something I already know I need.

Just order your meds over the net then and maybe die from drug interactions or some other complications.

 

[Screaming Eagle]

Becuase of the need to protect others.

Should anyone be allowed to be a DR. with no training?

Because of the need to protect others from what? What the hell are you blathering about?

I do not support the government in endorsing who they feel to be qualified to do anything. Their license issuing and testing and regulating of professionals is a joke. I would much rather go to doctors who were independently approved by a third party group. I don't believe in paying a doctor $150 to get a prescription for something I already know I need.

Just order your meds over the net then and maybe die from drug interactions or some other complications.

Please draw the logical connections to what you just wrote. How does my imminent death follow from having someone other than the government tell me which doctors are capable and which aren't? Are you implying that even with 8 years education and far more extensive testing to prove competence than what the government currently provides, I would not be able to count on a pharmacist to advise me on drug interactions unless the government licenses them? Then some sort of government magic descends on these people and they crap gold nuggets?

 

[uscitizen]

Because of the need to protect others from what? What the hell are you blathering about?

I do not support the government in endorsing who they feel to be qualified to do anything. Their license issuing and testing and regulating of professionals is a joke. I would much rather go to doctors who were independently approved by a third party group. I don't believe in paying a doctor $150 to get a prescription for something I already know I need.

Just order your meds over the net then and maybe die from drug interactions or some other complications.

Please draw the logical connections to what you just wrote. How does my imminent death follow from having someone other than the government tell me which doctors are capable and which aren't? Are you implying that even with 8 years education and far more extensive testing to prove competence than what the government currently provides, I would not be able to count on a pharmacist to advise me on drug interactions unless the government licenses them? Then some sort of government magic descends on these people and they crap gold nuggets?

Lets carry the same concept to pharmacists. Why would you need one of those?
Or even the FDA to try and ensure you drug is produced properly and safely?

Same reason for all of those.

 

[WillowTree]

Tell me again when Obama said he was going to take away your guns?
All this shows me is a bunch of wacko's who live in fear, felt the need to buy even more guns.

Stop being so negative. Think of all the jobs obama saved!!! how many people does it take to make 14 million guns?? how many people does it take to sell 14 million guns? how many people does it take to do all the paperwork on 14 million guns?? now! do you feel better?

 

[blu]

i love the retards that think they will take out the army if/when any president tries to turn the usa into a dictatorship. the sheep in the military will kill any citizen that fights back like they have done in the past.

 

[slackjawed]

i love the retards that think they will take out the army if/when any president tries to turn the usa into a dictatorship. the sheep in the military will kill any citizen that fights back like they have done in the past.

Most of the citizens militia here is made up of current and former military.
Look at some photos of our soldiars in iraq or afaghanistan.
See how many are wearing that 'oathkeeper' patch?
I guess it just depends on which side the army is on doesn't it?