From my cold, dead. hands! Except in Detroit and Chicago - Page 180 - Politics and Economics

Two Plus Two Forums Other Topics Politics

From my cold, dead. hands! Except in Detroit and Chicago

...

Page 180 of 1110

First

80 130 160 170 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 190 200 230 280 380 680

Last

Page 180 of 1110

First

80 130 160 170 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 190 200 230 280 380 680

Last

12-20-2012 , 02:06 PM

#4476

MrWookie

Don't Call Me Meredith

Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 94,159

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huehuecoyotl

I should probably make a new thread since we already have a gun thread but I'd be curious what civil liberty "crosses the line" where gun owners would start agitating to use their guns in defense. So far violations of habeas corpus, one of the oldest and most fundamental rights doesn't seem to bother them, nor targeted assassination, nor internment of Americans during WWII so what will?

Fly's been making this argument in here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ikestoys

Dude your argument is essentially something bad happened, ergo all possible bad things happened. That's ****ing dumb.

People defend their own individual rights with guns all the ****ing time. If you want to talk specifically about civil rights, here's an article you should read. Your statement is completely historically inaccurate and illogical.

But that's not strictly the gun nut's argument. As we've seen many times ITT, gun owners don't merely think that they're protecting their own rights. They love love LOVE to claim that they're protecting the rights of non gun owners. And no, they don't merely claim that they're defending the rights of non-gun-owners from common criminals, but also from the government. Yet, that's never happened once in history, despite many examples of government abuse.

12-20-2012 , 02:17 PM

#4477

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 12,263

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrWookie

Fly's been making this argument in here.

But that's not strictly the gun nut's argument. As we've seen many times ITT, gun owners don't merely think that they're protecting their own rights. They love love LOVE to claim that they're protecting the rights of non gun owners. And no, they don't merely claim that they're defending the rights of non-gun-owners from common criminals, but also from the government. Yet, that's never happened once in history, despite many examples of government abuse.

Maybe there was one time in in the 1770s.

12-20-2012 , 02:25 PM

#4478

FlyWf

It's the other way

Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 58,090

I like that the Reason article quotes, with approval, about how armed blacks managed to turn lynchings into race riots where dozens of people died. Fantastic.

But wait. So the black people had guns. They had guns as early as 1906! Yet civil rights didn't get better? Did the Klan not know the black people had guns?

Like, Jesus Christ, there's a story in there about how a well-armed black guy got killed by a lawless mob in 1936. He had a gun! PROBLEM SOLVED! Oh wait, no, what he needed was the government. He needed law and order to be imposed by the tyrannical long arm of the federal government.

12-20-2012 , 02:38 PM

#4479

MrWookie

Don't Call Me Meredith

Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 94,159

Quote:

Originally Posted by RR

Maybe there was one time in in the 1770s.

Yeah, the Stamp Act was pretty horrific.

12-20-2012 , 02:39 PM

#4480

Money2Burn

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 12,628

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gin 'n Tonic

For all those 'cars kill people too' posters...

Gun deaths in America projected to soon top car fatalities

Of course, as technology advances cars get safer, guns just get 'better'.

Gun manufacturers really are in the best position to deal with many of these problems.

12-20-2012 , 03:04 PM

#4481

Omar Comin

fantasy failure

Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 27,348

just trying to protect the kids over here

12-20-2012 , 03:06 PM

#4482

Omar Comin

fantasy failure

Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 27,348

no tax no papers bro

12-20-2012 , 03:10 PM

#4483

superleeds

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 4,180

Quote:

Originally Posted by lozen

Lets face it as a CDN I cant fathom your love of guns. I cant fathom gun lovers interpretation of the second amendment. WE always joked that it was your right to wear short sleeved shirts.

I think nothing will change. Money buys Washington and the NRA is power. In 2-3 weeks many will have forgotten and moved on to the next big you tube video.

At best you may get a law banning assault rifles and than the NRA will go to court and appeal the law and win with a republican controlled Supreme Court. Also good luck getting Bubba to give up his 13 assault rifles as the title of this thread says
From my cold, dead. hands!

This would be the easy bit, just dress it up in some nationalistic bs and they will be the first ones patriotically handing them over

12-20-2012 , 03:12 PM

#4484

Cornboy

veteran

Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 2,429

Quote:

Originally Posted by Money2Burn

George Zimmerman had lightning fast response time.

He was a precog.

12-20-2012 , 03:16 PM

#4485

ikestoys

banned

Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 94,424

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrWookie

Someone didn't read the article. Plenty of examples of fighting the government in there.

12-20-2012 , 03:19 PM

#4486

Lavon Affair

banned

Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 537

Quote:

Originally Posted by superleeds

This would be the easy bit, just dress it up in some nationalistic bs and they will be the first ones patriotically handing them over

have some muslims shoot up some **** and you might be right.

12-20-2012 , 03:33 PM

#4487

Low Key

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 33,327

Just stopping by to point out that I'm one of the top non-mod posters itt and I have neither been infracted nor banned for posts itt.

12-20-2012 , 03:43 PM

#4488

Schwatt

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 4,521

RE: "hi cap" mags for handguns

As far as I know, most neutered handgun mags have a block in them to restrict capacity. (I own several I got with handguns I bought during the ban, but I never use them, full capacity only for me) They must be the same length so they fit flush with the bottom of the grip.

If a criminal wanted to get around that, they could simply remove the floorplate, remove the block, and install a longer spring.

So if a criminal wanted to use a full capacity mag for illegal activities, how is the ban forcing companies to sell neutered mags going to be effective?

12-20-2012 , 03:46 PM

#4489

MrWookie

Don't Call Me Meredith

Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 94,159

Man, it's like there's no other way to restrict capacity in a magazine other than that! What a dilemma!

12-20-2012 , 03:48 PM

#4490

Hendricks433

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 4,938

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schwatt

Ban all semi autos and removable mags obviously because we know how guns work.

I still don't see the point in banning AR's and big mags. Assault Rifles aren't used in many killings and only recently in the mass killing. You limit the guy to 10 round so he carries 2 hand guns with 10 round so he kills 18-20 people instead of 28?

12-20-2012 , 03:49 PM

#4491

skinner3

centurion

Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 155

Usual psychos will not ever bother to modify weapon in anyway.

12-20-2012 , 03:49 PM

#4492

Hendricks433

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 4,938

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrWookie

Man, it's like there's no other way to restrict capacity in a magazine other than that! What a dilemma!

Hi cap mags already exist, they're not just going to disappear off the earth and same argument above. So they kill 20 instead of 28, that's not a solution IMO.

12-20-2012 , 03:50 PM

#4493

Hendricks433

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 4,938

Quote:

Originally Posted by skinner3

Usual psychos will not ever bother to modify weapon in anyway.

Confirmed.

12-20-2012 , 03:56 PM

#4494

Cornboy

veteran

Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 2,429

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hendricks433

You limit the guy to 10 round so he carries 2 hand guns with 10 round so he kills 18-20 people instead of 28?

18-20 would be preferable to 28, yes.

Last edited by Cornboy; 12-20-2012 at 03:57 PM. Reason: Can't wait to see how this point gets argued.

12-20-2012 , 04:00 PM

#4495

Hendricks433

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 4,938

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cornboy

18-20 would be preferable to 28, yes.

18-20 is still unacceptable. Also CT shooter was carrying 3 guns. So now he carries 5 with 10 round mags and still kills 28. Limiting mags is definitely the solution.

12-20-2012 , 04:05 PM

#4496

Cornboy

veteran

Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 2,429

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hendricks433

18-20 is still unacceptable. Also CT shooter was carrying 3 guns. So now he carries 5 with 10 round mags and still kills 28. Limiting mags is definitely the solution.

I don't believe anyone here has said that limiting mags is the solution to murder. I could have missed those posts.

I've read a few posts that suggest limiting mags could limit the number of deaths, which I think we'll all agree is a good thing. I'll quote one for you:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hendricks433

You limit the guy to 10 round so he carries 2 hand guns with 10 round so he kills 18-20 people instead of 28?

This guy is on the right track.

12-20-2012 , 04:06 PM

#4497

Jbrochu

banned

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 16,052

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hendricks433

18-20 is still unacceptable. Also CT shooter was carrying 3 guns. So now he carries 5 with 10 round mags and still kills 28. Limiting mags is definitely the solution.

And if we limit them to single-shot he would just carry 28. Makes total sense.

12-20-2012 , 04:13 PM

#4498

Hendricks433

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 4,938

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jbrochu

And if we limit them to single-shot he would just carry 28. Makes total sense.

Yea because we're going to limit guns to single shot.

Multiple guns + mag changes make the limitations of mags almost if not completely irrelevant.

For gun control guys, say you limit assault rifles and limit mags, what else do you do? Because shooting will still happen with similar fatalities.

12-20-2012 , 04:13 PM

#4499

skinner3

centurion

Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 155

The number of guns owned by one person must be limited too, unless you are a collector you don't need more then 1 hand gun (for self defense) and 1 rifle (for hunting).

12-20-2012 , 04:16 PM

#4500

JammyDodga

veteran

Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 2,268

Quote:

Originally Posted by gusmahler

Interesting post on why the AR-15 is popular

(warning, pro-gun website):

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/201...e-ar-15-rifle/

Quote:

A great offensive weapon makes a great defensive weapon. The AR-15 is an easy-to-use and effective rifle for self-defense, both at close and distant ranges. If someone was defending say, a school, and they were positioned at the end of a corridor, an AR-15 would give them the speed, repeatability (i.e. ammunition capacity) and/or accuracy they’d need to eliminate a lethal threat. Or threats.

Wow.

Page 180 of 1110

First

80 130 160 170 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 190 200 230 280 380 680

Last

...

Page 180 of 1110

First

80 130 160 170 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 190 200 230 280 380 680

Last