Ban all guns?

[Uncensored2008]

Dorner was fired, he was not a retired police officer. I can't speak to the other exceptions. IMO only active duty LE personnel should have legal access to high velocity high volume guns which are easily concealable.

Why would any sane person advocate that the police have access to greater fire power than the people?

Is your lust for tyranny so great?

 

[kwc57]

So IYO, why is this responsible? Just because something is getting banned? You just tired of criminals having weapons?

TN, try to write a concise and sensible post.

Wry, try to pull your pinhead out of your ass.

 

[TNHarley]

So IYO, why is this responsible? Just because something is getting banned? You just tired of criminals having weapons?

TN, try to write a concise and sensible post.

Wry, try to pull your pinhead out of your ass.

He just didn't have an answer. My question was not in the link for him to plagiarize

 

[Wry Catcher]

Dorner was fired, he was not a retired police officer. I can't speak to the other exceptions. IMO only active duty LE personnel should have legal access to high velocity high volume guns which are easily concealable.

Why would any sane person advocate that the police have access to greater fire power than the people?

Is your lust for tyranny so great?

Why would a sane person support a National Police Force, is the better question. There is good reason for cities and towns to have their own police agency and not allow the Sheriff to be the only LE agency within a county.

The reason is simple. High capacity, high volume and even armor piercing ammunition exists in the public domain. Whose gonna protect the private sector if not the police? You?

 

[kwc57]

Efforts to derail this thread and obfuscate the LIE which has been posted by NRA fellow travelers and others whose gun is more important than the lives of children is duly noted.

That was funny.

You lie, and complain when no one believes you,

Really? Thanks for sharing. To bad I don't care what you post or write. Stating that some on this board have discounted the victims at Sandy Hook is untrue makes you the liar. It's too bad you confuse complaining with a statement the facts.

Negged for douchebaggery.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Why would a sane person support a National Police Force, is the better question.

That isn't a "better question," it's a red herring - a logical fallacy.

There is good reason for cities and towns to have their own police agency and not allow the Sheriff to be the only LE agency within a county.

Irrelevant.

Why would any sane person advocate that the police have access to arms denied the citizenry?

Of course no SANE person would, but leftists do.

The reason is simple. High capacity, high volume and even armor piercing ammunition exists in the public domain. Whose gonna protect the private sector if not the police? You?

The police don't protect anyone. The police enforce laws. After you are murdered, the police might investigate and might arrest the perpetrator. This may, or may not, act as a deterrent to crime. But the police will not protect you, you must defend yourself.

 

[Wry Catcher]

That was funny.

You lie, and complain when no one believes you,

Really? Thanks for sharing. To bad I don't care what you post or write. Stating that some on this board have discounted the victims at Sandy Hook is untrue makes you the liar. It's too bad you confuse complaining with a statement the facts.

Negged for douchebaggery.

Too bad that's all ya got. Write back when you have something of substance to offer.

 

[kwc57]

really? Thanks for sharing. To bad i don't care what you post or write. Stating that some on this board have discounted the victims at sandy hook is untrue makes you the liar. It's too bad you confuse complaining with a statement the facts.

negged for douchebaggery.

too bad that's all ya got. Write back when you have something of substance to offer.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Now you devolve into spreading ignorance, some arms are already restricted/controlled and have withstood Constitutional examination.

Most of the ones restricted are not used by police forces. You dont see the police walking around with Ma Duces or M-60's (most places).

I dont care if over 2200 guns are "still legal" The ones you want banned are common, in general use, and are protected by the 2nd amendment.

So you say. I'm not a Constitutional Scholar nor pretentious like you to assume the wording in the Second means all arms are protected. I'll leave that to the USSC to decide if Congress does the right thing and passes some rational and reasonable arms control.

[Does it not occur to you that those so opposed to any gun control are similar to those in leadership in North Korea and Iran?]

The point of this thread was to expose the LIES and slippery slope arguments which proliferate on this board. Finally you acknowledge that lies, by admitting over 2,200 guns will remain legal.

BTW, as angry as you got by my post, it's a good thing you don't own a gun. Think about it. Are you emotionally stable and mature enough to own a gun?

Correct.

Which is why enactment of such a measure would allow for some resolution of the matter, concerning weapons ‘dangerous and unusual’ and those considered ‘in common use at the time.’

 

[Quantum Windbag]

So far the only person I have quoted in this thread is Dianne Feistein. If I was trying to prove how smart I am she would be the last person I would quote.

It's Diane Feinstein; I suspect it would be a good idea to know something about those you choose to call stupid. Spelling their name properly is also a good idea under that circumstance.

Dianne Feinstein - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I don't recall calling her stupid, even though she is, maybe you could find that somewhere else in this thread. What I said is I wouldn't quote her if I was trying to look smart.

Still no answer to my question, I wonder why.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Dorner was fired, he was not a retired police officer. I can't speak to the other exceptions. IMO only active duty LE personnel should have legal access to high velocity high volume guns which are easily concealable.

Why would any sane person advocate that the police have access to greater fire power than the people?

Is your lust for tyranny so great?

Why would a sane person support a National Police Force, is the better question. There is good reason for cities and towns to have their own police agency and not allow the Sheriff to be the only LE agency within a county.

The reason is simple. High capacity, high volume and even armor piercing ammunition exists in the public domain. Whose gonna protect the private sector if not the police? You?

Strange that you complain about armor piercing ammunition, and ignore the fact that the only ammunition specifically designed not to pierce armor is banned in multiple jurisdictions.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Really? Thanks for sharing. To bad I don't care what you post or write. Stating that some on this board have discounted the victims at Sandy Hook is untrue makes you the liar. It's too bad you confuse complaining with a statement the facts.

Negged for douchebaggery.

Too bad that's all ya got. Write back when you have something of substance to offer.

For the record, I did NOT neg you for your douchbaggery!

 

[TNHarley]

So far the only person I have quoted in this thread is Dianne Feistein. If I was trying to prove how smart I am she would be the last person I would quote.

It's Diane Feinstein; I suspect it would be a good idea to know something about those you choose to call stupid. Spelling their name properly is also a good idea under that circumstance.

Dianne Feinstein - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I don't recall calling her stupid, even though she is, maybe you could find that somewhere else in this thread. What I said is I wouldn't quote her if I was trying to look smart.

Still no answer to my question, I wonder why.

Me too

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You Betcha, as so many on this message board have claimed is the attempt by 'liberals' and The POTUS. Seems as is the case on most on all issues, the far right fringe is lying again. Over 2,200 firearms will remain legal if the Congress has the guts to pass responsible gun control/regulations.

Latest try at new assault weapons ban would exempt more than 2,200 specific firearms - The Washington Post

A list of exempted firearms was not part of Feinstein’s original assault weapons ban two decades ago, said Michael Lenett, one of the lead congressional staffers on gun control issues in 1994. A separate bill in circulation exempted far fewer hunting and sporting firearms, Lenett said.

1 the second amendment is not about hunting or sport shooting
2. For a firearm to be protected by the second amendment it MUST have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, AND be the kind in common use at the time SUPPLIED BY THE MILITIA MEMBER.
Miller vs. U.S. Lewis vs U.S.

 

[Redbone]

Who, on this thread and on this forum generally, truly believes that gun bans, or restrictions, will fail to skew the firearms balance in favour of the criminal ?

Are criminals going to be so 'law abiding' that they'll never consider getting illegal weapons ?

The tougher it becomes to qualify for legal gun ownership, so the tougher it'll become for the ordinary citizen to exercise control over his or her capacity for personal defence.

I come from a society that has some of the toughest gun laws on the planet .. and one where there is NO 'right to bear arms'. The result is that the criminal wins. And we've become a people almost totally dependent on our Authorities for our OWN means of defence.

Unfortunately, I haven't posted enough posts, yet, to qualify for being able to post Internet links to pages. So I just have to recommend that anyone reading this will do some research on 'Tony Martin', a farmer in the UK who suffered enormously just because he defended his farm from burglary with a shotgun.

See from that case what living in an 'anti' gun culture can lead to.

[Perhaps I'll come back to this thread at a later date and post it -]

I have read about that case . Injustice is rampant in this world. Every man should have the right to defend his home.

BBC News - Tony Martin welcomes increased power to protect home
Tony Martin welcomes increased power to protect home
Tony Martin said he would brandish a chainsaw to warn intruders at his home

Timeline: The Tony Martin case
A man who killed a 16-year-old intruder at his home has welcomed government plans to give extra legal protection to householders who attack burglars.

Tony Martin, who was jailed in 2000 for shooting Fred Barras at his Norfolk farmhouse, said people should not "live in fear in their home".

He said he would be willing to brandish a chainsaw to defend himself.

"I'd let it run and I'd show it to him," he said. "If he decided he was going to have me, I'd let him have it."

Mr Martin was released from prison in 2003 after his murder conviction was reduced to manslaughter. He also injured 29-year-old Brendan Fearon in the same incident.

At the Conservative Party conference, Justice Secretary Chris Grayling said "grossly disproportionate" force would still be against the law in England and Wales, but the bar would be higher than the current "proportionate" force test.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

So far the only person I have quoted in this thread is Dianne Feistein. If I was trying to prove how smart I am she would be the last person I would quote.

It's Diane Feinstein; I suspect it would be a good idea to know something about those you choose to call stupid. Spelling their name properly is also a good idea under that circumstance.

Dianne Feinstein - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

She's a dumb *****.

 

[Redbone]

So far the only person I have quoted in this thread is Dianne Feistein. If I was trying to prove how smart I am she would be the last person I would quote.

It's Diane Feinstein; I suspect it would be a good idea to know something about those you choose to call stupid. Spelling their name properly is also a good idea under that circumstance.

Dianne Feinstein - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

She's a dumb *****.

Understatement but spot on. Boxer, Pelosi and that ignorant creature would frighten the Medusa.

 

[Britfire54]

Who, on this thread and on this forum generally, truly believes that gun bans, or restrictions, will fail to skew the firearms balance in favour of the criminal ?

Are criminals going to be so 'law abiding' that they'll never consider getting illegal weapons ?

The tougher it becomes to qualify for legal gun ownership, so the tougher it'll become for the ordinary citizen to exercise control over his or her capacity for personal defence.

I come from a society that has some of the toughest gun laws on the planet .. and one where there is NO 'right to bear arms'. The result is that the criminal wins. And we've become a people almost totally dependent on our Authorities for our OWN means of defence.

Unfortunately, I haven't posted enough posts, yet, to qualify for being able to post Internet links to pages. So I just have to recommend that anyone reading this will do some research on 'Tony Martin', a farmer in the UK who suffered enormously just because he defended his farm from burglary with a shotgun.

See from that case what living in an 'anti' gun culture can lead to.

[Perhaps I'll come back to this thread at a later date and post it -]

I have read about that case . Injustice is rampant in this world. Every man should have the right to defend his home.

Thanks, Redbone.

Americans would be wise to understand that the more controls your Left-wingers can get on this issue, the more they'll seek. It definitely WON'T stop where you think it should ! The Tony Martin example gives you a glimpse of just how far Socialist control-freakery can, and will, go, if ever allowed to. As in my society, use a firearm to defend yourself and your property, and the result CAN be to see the hapless citizen criminalised every bit as much as the criminals you're defending against. Justice goes out the window for the sake of total societal control over the individual.

 

[Britfire54]

OK .. I should be enabled, now, to post URL's.

This link is one showing the sequence of events involving Tony Martin, in the UK. Please study it, and see for yourself where a Socialist anti-gun culture can lead.

BBC NEWS | UK | England | Norfolk | Timeline: The Tony Martin case

Who, here, can possibly believe that Mr Martin was treated justly ???

 

[Steve Hanson]

You Betcha, as so many on this message board have claimed is the attempt by 'liberals' and The POTUS. Seems as is the case on most on all issues, the far right fringe is lying again. Over 2,200 firearms will remain legal if the Congress has the guts to pass responsible gun control/regulations.

Latest try at new assault weapons ban would exempt more than 2,200 specific firearms - The Washington Post

Members of congress will be signing their retirement papers if they pass some of the proposed legislation.