Simple SOLUTION to gun control

[amrchaos]

All you gun grabbers that are upset by the fact the 2nd Amendment protects our right to own weapons... simple solution.

Since no law that bans semi automatics will survive a court challenge and since no law banning magazine sizes will either, go for what you REALLY want.

Ask for an amendment to repel the 2nd. Or are you afraid that admitting your goal is the elimination of all firearms will not pass muster with the citizenry?

I used that argument dealing with abortion. No one is going to bite the hand that feeds them!!

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Sorry, but that's the dumbest "solution" I've seen anyone come up with...and that's saying a lot.

I love my guns and want to keep them. I also support sensible gun laws.

Sensible gun laws are the foundation to tyranny. What at one time started off being sensible became tyranny. Can you name one law that restricted rights that wasn't started with good intentions that did in the end take someones right away?

I'll use an example the seat beat law, when it first became law it was just going to be a 25.00 fins and not go on your license. Now it's a 200.00 and adds penalty points on license.

All sensible gun laws gun laws do is give the next gun grabber a foundation to create more sensible gun laws, and keep going until no one has the right to own a gun.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

What do gun folks use those assault and semi-auto weapons for? Do you hunt with them?

Are any guns off-limits for regular folk? How about an uzi (is that even a gun)? lol

Just curious.

What do gun folks use those assault and semi-auto weapons for? Do you hunt with them?

I don't have any assault weapons, but my semi- automatics I have are for the government PERIOD.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Was just wondering if a semi-auto weapon would pulverize that bunny. lol And no, I did not know that about the SC gun ruling. Thx, RGS.

Never know when that cute little bunny will try to become a dictator.

 

[thanatos144]

Was just wondering if a semi-auto weapon would pulverize that bunny. lol And no, I did not know that about the SC gun ruling. Thx, RGS.

Moron semi-automatic just means it lodes next round itself from the magazine after you shoot......If you weren't so fucking ignorant you would know that.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

What about revolvers? they function just like a semiautomatic does.
You have to squeeze the trigger to fire every round.

 

[thanatos144]

Simple solution to gun bans????? All progressive give up their guns and let them see if it makes them safer.

 

[eflatminor]

Was just wondering if a semi-auto weapon would pulverize that bunny.

Well that would depend on the caliber and ballistic characteristics of the round, wouldn't it? Do you even know what a semi-auto weapon is? Are you aware that 86% of firearms are semi-autos and that they come in all kinds of calibers from a tiny .17 to the big 50BMG?

It's okay if your're ignorant. Maybe you could learn but if it's your IQ, there's nothing we can do about that.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The 1939 Supreme Court ruling would disagree with you. In order to be protected under the second Amendment a weapon must be in use, of use or previously in use by the military. That clearly includes high capacity magazines.

That would also include fully automatic weapons, so by your logic the Aurora killer should have been able to legally purchase and own those to carry out his act.

Automatic weapons are considered crew served or squad weapons...

M14 M16 M4 MP5 M249... all automatic, all personal weapons.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

That would also include fully automatic weapons, so by your logic the Aurora killer should have been able to legally purchase and own those to carry out his act.

Automatic weapons are considered crew served or squad weapons...

M14 M16 M4 MP5 M249... all automatic, all personal weapons.

Any automatic firearm manufactured before 1986 are legal to own.

 

[thanatos144]

That would also include fully automatic weapons, so by your logic the Aurora killer should have been able to legally purchase and own those to carry out his act.

Automatic weapons are considered crew served or squad weapons...

M14 M16 M4 MP5 M249... all automatic, all personal weapons.

Did you take the class and register your guns like the law said??????

 

[M14 Shooter]

You claimed that in order for there to be constitutionally sound limitations put on the rights to free speech and gun ownership, there has to be a clear, immediate, and present danger that the law is addressing.
There is no such criterion.

This is a lie, or abject ignorance.
Decide which and let us know.

You're denying you said this?

I did say exaclty that,
You then mispreprestend what I said in otder to get around it.
That makes you a liar, or ignorant.

YOU brought up the ability to ban slander libel and Fire in a theater.

You can constitutionally ban yelling fire in crowded theatre despite the 1st amendment only becauase doing so harms others or places people in a condition of clear, present and immediate danger.

If you want to use the restrictions against slander/libel/fire in a theater as an analog as to how you can constituionally ban 100-rd magazines, you then have to show how 100-rd magazines, like slander/libel/fire in a a theater, harms others or places people in a condition of clear, present and immediate danger.

If you cannot do this, your argument fails and my statement stands; you and I both know you do not have a prayer of showing any such thing and so you will respons witn more or your mindless dishonesty and bigory.

 

[M14 Shooter]

It forces someone to re-load instead of spraying seemingly limitless numbers of rounds into formerly breathing individuals.

What's the difference in time between firing off 3x20 magazines and 6x10 rd magazines from an AR-15, and how does that difference in time support the necessity of the ban you propose?

Re-loading time. When you're not firing, the police can take shots at you with more accuracy, people you're shooting at can get away.

So... you don't know.
If you do not know the difference in time, and thus, unable to describe the effect that your proposal might have, how can your argument have any significance?

No, its a limit on the size of magazines/clips. Not a ban.

It -is- a ban, a ban on magazines above that arbitraru and subjective limit.

Clips/magazines aren't mentioned in the Constitution of the US.

Hmm. Neither are words. By your argument, words can be banned as well.

Only an idiot would make such a statement.

Yes, only an idiot would state that because magaxzine arent mentioneed in the 2nd amendment they arent protected by it, regardless of the fact that they are an intergal part of the operations of weapons that ARE protected by the Constitution.

-No- difference between the two statements

 

[M14 Shooter]

Automatic weapons are considered crew served or squad weapons...

M14 M16 M4 MP5 M249... all automatic, all personal weapons.

Any automatic firearm manufactured before 1986 are legal to own.

Yes. Stupid law, that.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Automatic weapons are considered crew served or squad weapons...

M14 M16 M4 MP5 M249... all automatic, all personal weapons.

Did you take the class and register your guns like the law said??????

You don't need to take a class.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

M14 M16 M4 MP5 M249... all automatic, all personal weapons.

Any automatic firearm manufactured before 1986 are legal to own.

Yes. Stupid law, that.

Yes it is.

 

[signelect]

What do gun folks use those assault and semi-auto weapons for? Do you hunt with them?

Are any guns off-limits for regular folk? How about an uzi (is that even a gun)? lol

Just curious.

The answer to your question is I DO pretty much whatever I WANT within the law. I am a law abiding citizen. You have little if anything to fear from me. Your problem is with the criminal...you know...the guy that has no problem getting whatever illegal substance he or she wants to and using them in a criminal manner without regard to the laws. Ice, heroin, any number of banned substances manages to find its way into the country and onto the streets. Guns do as well. Your worrying about MY ownership of ANY firearm, be it a single shot .22 or a freqin cannon is foolishness.

Why do you people feel the need to make law abiding citizens justify the execution of their constitutional rights? Do you have to justify your speech? Do you have to justify your right to avoid self incrimination? Do you have to justify ANY of the rights you hold precious and have guaranteed under the Bill of Rights? Should you?

The term 'assault rifle' is a manufactured media term. Ooooo scary...its AN 'ASSAULT' rifle. Its not. Its just a rifle. And BTW...the 'assault rifle' used in the Colorado attacks failed, leaving the shooter to use a more banal handgun and shotgun...with lethal effect. Shame no one in that crowd was similarly armed or at least trained in lethal response. 71 people need not have died.

71 people did not die, lets stay with the facts. I agree with your arguement. Only law abiding citizens are going to obey any laws so it still doesn't solve the problem Punish the criminal. I mean punish not pamper. Since is it not my job to judge lets send them on their way to the man that does.

 

[candycorn]

What's the difference in time between firing off 3x20 magazines and 6x10 rd magazines from an AR-15, and how does that difference in time support the necessity of the ban you propose?

Re-loading time. When you're not firing, the police can take shots at you with more accuracy, people you're shooting at can get away.

So... you don't know.
If you do not know the difference in time, and thus, unable to describe the effect that your proposal might have, how can your argument have any significance?

Anyone with two brain cells would know that it would take longer to load 6 magazines instead of three. You should ask someone with said common sense.

It -is- a ban, a ban on magazines above that arbitraru and subjective limit.

Most would call it a limit; a reasonable limit at that but those with an agenda would try to put the word "ban" where it doesn't belong. Those people must be worried about such things.

Hmm. Neither are words. By your argument, words can be banned as well.

Only an idiot would make such a statement.

Yes, only an idiot would state that because magaxzine arent mentioneed in the 2nd amendment they arent protected by it, regardless of the fact that they are an intergal part of the operations of weapons that ARE protected by the Constitution.

-No- difference between the two statements[/QUOTE]

They aren't protected by it. Sorry.

The integrity of the weapon isn't compromised by limiting the size of such a component.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Re-loading time. When you're not firing, the police can take shots at you with more accuracy, people you're shooting at can get away.

So... you don't know.
If you do not know the difference in time, and thus, unable to describe the effect that your proposal might have, how can your argument have any significance?

Anyone with two brain cells would know that it would take longer to load 6 magazines instead of three. You should ask someone with said common sense.

You job is to show how much more time and how that time is significant.
Thus far, you have failed miserably.

Most would call it a limit;

Most who arent honest enough to admit it is a ban, yes.

Yes, only an idiot would state that because magaxzine arent mentioneed in the 2nd amendment they arent protected by it, regardless of the fact that they are an intergal part of the operations of weapons that ARE protected by the Constitution.
-No- difference between the two statements

They aren't protected by it. Sorry.

They are every bit as protected by it as words are by the first. Sorry.

 

[eflatminor]

Anyone with two brain cells would know that it would take longer to load 6 magazines instead of three. You should ask someone with said common sense.

Actually, the higher capacity magazines are far more prone to jamming than 10 and 20 round mags. 100 round drums are notoriously unreliable, as the guy in Colorado learned first hand.

So, if the goal is to get 100 rounds fired as fast as possible, I'll take five 20 round mags over a 100 round drum every time. Besides, if you know what you're doing, it only takes a fraction of a second to change a magazine.