Weapons of war in civilian hands

[Stormy Daniels]

As both sides are correct and incorrect on this subject, it becomes extremely tiresome for us all. Of course any type of bullet used in war can also be used for other firearms uses. Sanctimoniously sticking to technical definitions does nothing to advance the debate. Dramatically broad-brushing all firearms and their owners doesn't, either.
What the firearms extremists failed to deal with adequately was the genuine feelings of the majority of those horrified by disgusting crimes. It could only have been expected that if such things continued an outcry would occur. The 'gunners' would have done well to organize very open, relaxed classes and presentations about their beloved weapons. They should have held real militia assemblies, but in a cookout and tailgate atmosphere.
Instead, all we have seen is foul-mouthed rejection of absolutely anything that did not toe the line of firearms fetishists. How do they expect people to react to a group that fully acknowledges being armed to the teeth and expresses frequently the readiness, even the desire, to use them to effect their political will?

Okay, so you're disgusted. That's cool.

What does that have to do with passing pointless gun laws? Are you advocating for emotionally driven legislation that abandons rational thought?

 

[there4eyeM]

As both sides are correct and incorrect on this subject, it becomes extremely tiresome for us all. Of course any type of bullet used in war can also be used for other firearms uses. Sanctimoniously sticking to technical definitions does nothing to advance the debate. Dramatically broad-brushing all firearms and their owners doesn't, either.
What the firearms extremists failed to deal with adequately was the genuine feelings of the majority of those horrified by disgusting crimes. It could only have been expected that if such things continued an outcry would occur. The 'gunners' would have done well to organize very open, relaxed classes and presentations about their beloved weapons. They should have held real militia assemblies, but in a cookout and tailgate atmosphere.
Instead, all we have seen is foul-mouthed rejection of absolutely anything that did not toe the line of firearms fetishists. How do they expect people to react to a group that fully acknowledges being armed to the teeth and expresses frequently the readiness, even the desire, to use them to effect their political will?

What in the above could be taken as supporting more ineffective legislation? Lawmakers already serve up too much of nothing with a little harm on the side.

The country needs a non-religious revival of its soul.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

To clearly define what is and what is not a weapon of war. Also what is what is not a weapon individual citizens can purchase for protection and recreation.

Too much ambiguity in the language is a problem because of technological advances in weapons that make these shooting rampages so deadly.

The only thing Texas needs from California is some of those Humboldt County Buds.

Again, I understand what you are attempting to do, but why not just say that you want the 2nd Amendment to be abolished. After all, the 2nd Amendment is nothing more than a limit on federal power.

You want to remove that limitation on the Federal Government.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

As both sides are correct and incorrect on this subject, it becomes extremely tiresome for us all. Of course any type of bullet used in war can also be used for other firearms uses. Sanctimoniously sticking to technical definitions does nothing to advance the debate. Dramatically broad-brushing all firearms and their owners doesn't, either.
What the firearms extremists failed to deal with adequately was the genuine feelings of the majority of those horrified by disgusting crimes. It could only have been expected that if such things continued an outcry would occur. The 'gunners' would have done well to organize very open, relaxed classes and presentations about their beloved weapons. They should have held real militia assemblies, but in a cookout and tailgate atmosphere.
Instead, all we have seen is foul-mouthed rejection of absolutely anything that did not toe the line of firearms fetishists. How do they expect people to react to a group that fully acknowledges being armed to the teeth and expresses frequently the readiness, even the desire, to use them to effect their political will?

What in the above could be taken as supporting more ineffective legislation? Lawmakers already serve up too much of nothing with a little harm on the side.

The country needs a non-religious revival of its soul.

When you have some people wanting to restrict certain guns because they look scary, you end up with hyper-technical definitions to attempt to avoid restricting non-scary looking guns.

All guns are designed to kill organisms. Because humans are organisms, all guns are designed to kill humans. To restrict guns because they are allegedly designed to kill humans is ignorant and way over-broad.

This is why we have such a hard time believing that the gun grabbers only want a few "common sense" restrictions here and there. Everything they propose severely limits about 90% of current gun ownership. We suspect they know this and are hoping we are too stupid to get it. That approach is failing miserably.

 

[OKTexas]

Define that please. What makes something a "weapon of war"? What makes a gun a "military grade" weapon?

They will "define" it, don't you worry. And they will make it illegal for civilians to own. So if you can't quite figure it out, don't fret.

Really, based on what, 8 uses for mass shootings in 19 years? Do the math child, that is 8 incident days out of more than 34 trillion days these weapons have been in individuals hands. Come on child tell us what the odds are that one of these weapons will be used in a mass shooting on any given day, I couldn't find a calculator that had enough decimal points to calculate it.


.

 

[BlindBoo]

To clearly define what is and what is not a weapon of war. Also what is what is not a weapon individual citizens can purchase for protection and recreation.

Too much ambiguity in the language is a problem because of technological advances in weapons that make these shooting rampages so deadly.

The only thing Texas needs from California is some of those Humboldt County Buds.

Again, I understand what you are attempting to do, but why not just say that you want the 2nd Amendment to be abolished. After all, the 2nd Amendment is nothing more than a limit on federal power.

You want to remove that limitation on the Federal Government.

Um, no, if I wanted to abolish the 2nd I would have no problem saying so. But thanks for clarifying your closed minded position. By claiming that my position, that a new amendment is needed that would clarify what Scalia meant in 2008, is nothing more that me wanting to abolish the 2nd, you've closed down the discussion.

 

[iceberg]

That's pathetic. Look at the poll results.

THAT is pathetic. Hillary should be president based on the polls.

And, good thing polls don't dictate rights.

I don't care if we are in the majority. We have guns.

Wake up. We live in a democracy; eventually it will work.

republic, actually.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Um, no, if I wanted to abolish the 2nd I would have no problem saying so. But thanks for clarifying your closed minded position. By claiming that my position, that a new amendment is needed that would clarify what Scalia meant in 2008, is nothing more that me wanting to abolish the 2nd, you've closed down the discussion.

Calm down. I did not express a close-minded position nor did I accuse you of anything nefarious.

If the 2nd is nothing more than a limit on federal power (which it is) why does it need to be clarified by a new amendment? Like I said, if everyone recognized the 2nd for what it is --- nothing but a limit --- there would be no debate.

2nd Amendment = No Federal Gun Laws

To change it, means you want to give federal authority over guns.

That's all I am saying.

 

[iceberg]

60% Bootney, and that's the smallest percentage. Eventually that will make a difference.

So, constitutional rights are up for popular vote?

For the 3,789,462nd time, no one is taking away the Constitutional right to be armed.

House Democrats introduce bill prohibiting sale of semi-automatic weapons

this one is to ban ALL semi automatic weapons. that's a big chunk of guns, oldlady. at this rate you only really consider a bolt action and a revolver as acceptable means of guns these days and just because YOU feel it's enough does not warrant all having to go by your standards.

so yes - the fuckers are coming after them and this whole charade of NOT COMING AFTER GUNS needs to go away and die.

 

[iceberg]

For the 3,789,462nd time, no one is taking away the Constitutional right to be armed.

For the 3,789,463rd time, we don't believe you. Bullshit. You are lying. Okay? Get it? We don't trust you or believe you. Why? Gun-Control advocates have lied in the past.

If you don't want to take away the constitutional right to be armed, stop doing it.

Assault weapons were banned for ten years. Did anyone take all your guns? What makes you say anyone lied?

and did shootings go down?

House Democrats introduce bill prohibiting sale of semi-automatic weapons

and again cause you never seem to address this house bill trying to ban ALL semi-automatic guns.

 

[easyt65]

'Weapons of war in civilian hands'

I wonder how long it took some snowflake or backroom Liberal psycho-engineer to come up with this term to manipulate the emotions of idiot rubes out there.......

In the hands of skilled, trained 'operatives' ... or civilians .... a computer can be more 'deadly' than an AR-15. After 1 or two Youtube videos little Timmy Computernerd can learn to make explosives out of a small section of pipe, milk jugs, and materials he can find in his momma's cleaning cabinet or on Uncle Fester's farm capable of waging 'wars' and resistance actions.

According to the FBI more people are killed with knives.....according to the FBI 11 kids a day are killed by TEXTING and DRIVING. That means, on average, 22 kids died yesterday and today due to texting and driving. Another 11 will die tomorrow. Another 11 will die on Wednesday. At the end of the week 77 9SEVENTY SEVEN) kids will have died on the highways texting and driving, and not one damn Liberal is giving a second of air time lamenting over it or trying to come up with ways to stop it.

But let's create terms like 'Assault Rifle' and 'Weapons of War' to apply to the legal firearms socialist liberals want to strip from law-abiding citizens...while they completely IGNORE the REAL failures / problems demonstrated not only in Parkland but the lesson learned in Maryland, too.

Parkland:
- 'See Something, Say Something': CHECK, did it. It was IGNORED.
- School IDs the threat, considers having him committed. Nope. FAIL.
- Sheriff's department called approx. 40 times. Nothing.
- Social Media message threatening the school with an attack. Reported. Nothing.
- FBI did nothing...but did apologize for not doing their job.
- Sheriff orders his deputies to stand down, stay where it is safe, let the shooting continue
- Sheriff orders his deputies to defend him in the media.
- Sheriff reprimands swat team members for disobeying and going in to help
- Libs lecture everyone on how they don't need guns because the authorities, like the sheriff and his men, will protect them
- And then we hear endlessly how the fault lies with law-abiding gun owners, defenders of the 2nd Amendment, the NRA, etc...

It's those d@mn 'WEAPONS OF WAR' in civilian hands.....


....except then that pesky situation in Maryland happens.....and the media and libs do their best to try to downplay it and ignore it.


A shooter steps into a school, wounds several students, and hits the floor dead in less than 1 minute, killed by a guard with a gun.
- Only 3 students injured.
- The shooter was not allowed to go on a rampage.
- No waiting time for cops to get there....then cower outside until its all over.
- A trained, permit-carrying / legal gun owner / guard puts an end to the event in less than 1 minute

No 'assault weapon' narrative....
No 'weapons of war' narrative.
Shooter killed in failed attempt to attack protected school' .... does not aid the gun-grabbing agenda, no interest in the story.

 

[easyt65]

60% Bootney, and that's the smallest percentage. Eventually that will make a difference.

So, constitutional rights are up for popular vote?

For the 3,789,462nd time, no one is taking away the Constitutional right to be armed.

House Democrats introduce bill prohibiting sale of semi-automatic weapons

this one is to ban ALL semi automatic weapons. that's a big chunk of guns, oldlady. at this rate you only really consider a bolt action and a revolver as acceptable means of guns these days and just because YOU feel it's enough does not warrant all having to go by your standards.

so yes - the fuckers are coming after them and this whole charade of NOT COMING AFTER GUNS needs to go away and die.

No thank you. Have a nice day.

 

[Brain357]

Define that please. What makes something a "weapon of war"? What makes a gun a "military grade" weapon?

The type that can quickly kill 50 people in a night club. Semi auto rifles with high capacity magazines have shown they kill many really quickly.

 

[BluesLegend]

At a minimum we should be allowed to own the same guns law enforcement use. After all we must defend ourselves from the very same criminals. Hence semi auto and large capacity mags should be legal.

 

[BluesLegend]

Define that please. What makes something a "weapon of war"? What makes a gun a "military grade" weapon?

The type that can quickly kill 50 people in a night club. Semi auto rifles with high capacity magazines have shown they kill many really quickly.

Law enforcement uses these same rifles, hence we need them.

 

[Brain357]

At a minimum we should be allowed to own the same guns law enforcement use. After all we must defend ourselves from the very same criminals. Hence semi auto and large capacity mags should be legal.

Cause you are running around arresting criminals. You are hiding behind your guns while our children die.

 

[easyt65]

Define that please. What makes something a "weapon of war"? What makes a gun a "military grade" weapon?

The type that can quickly kill 50 people in a night club. Semi auto rifles with high capacity magazines have shown they kill many really quickly.

So...a pipe bomb...a K-BAR Knife in the hands of a skillfully trained Marine / Spec Ops....

 

[Brain357]

Define that please. What makes something a "weapon of war"? What makes a gun a "military grade" weapon?

The type that can quickly kill 50 people in a night club. Semi auto rifles with high capacity magazines have shown they kill many really quickly.

So...a pipe bomb...a K-BAR Knife in the hands of a skillfully trained Marine / Spec Ops....

Pipe bombs are illegal. What is our worst mass knifing?

 

[easyt65]

At a minimum we should be allowed to own the same guns law enforcement use. After all we must defend ourselves from the very same criminals. Hence semi auto and large capacity mags should be legal.

Cause you are running around arresting criminals. You are hiding behind your guns while our children die.

Isn't it a little strange to you that you and your liberal handlers' ultimate goal is to strip weapons out of the hands of law-abiding citizens who do not / have not committed these crimes? Why are you so intent on going after law abiding citizens?

Barry railed against citizens who legally owned guns and ended up giving Mexican Drug cartels thousands of automatic weapons and grenades. NONE of the people involved were seriously punished. Barry spent 8 years financing, supplying, ARMING, and training terrorists - he ARMED Al Qaeda, ISIS, and the Muslim Brotherhood while promoting the crusade against law-abiding US citizens having legal weapons. (Barry was the f*ing Poster child for why Americans should have the right to own weapons to protect themselves because he armed so many of our enemies / threats to our lives!)


How about going after the bad guys for a while, punishing the Sheriff's office for failing to do their jobs, punishing the FBI for failing to do their jobs, firing the school officials who knew the parkland shooter was a threat but did nothing.......? Leave the law-abiding citizens and the 2nd Amendment alone until you guys can do those things.

 

[iceberg]

At a minimum we should be allowed to own the same guns law enforcement use. After all we must defend ourselves from the very same criminals. Hence semi auto and large capacity mags should be legal.

Cause you are running around arresting criminals. You are hiding behind your guns while our children die.

and you're going after the gun most LEAST responsible for these deaths.

Analysis | 19 kids are shot every day in the United States