hey gun nuts

Tug-n-pull said:
WM69 you nailed it! WE don't need the bad black guns but more than that we sure do not need the goverment telling us we can't have em either! The right to bare arms! Just as importaint as free speach! The forefathers of this nation did not say the right to bare small cal. single shot rifels, but arms! tug

Right on Tug! They'll start with any semi-auto's that look like military rifles (or are military rifles), then they'll move to all semi-auto's. Then big calibers, to grain count in the ammo, then eventually we'll be reduced to having the right to bear a Daisy Red Ryder. Then some kid will shoot his eye out and they'll have to go too.

Food for thought: There are several rifles available under that "ban" which seriously outpower those that are illegal. What's the difference? How they look. Sure you can modify some easier than others to be fully automatic, then when those modified guns are found - arrest, try, convict the offender. Don't punish or rape the rights of the general public.

Remeber the snipers here in Maryland/DC/Virginia a year or so ago? They used a .223 through a hole in the trunk of a Chevy Caprice! One shot at a time. What did that gun "ban do for those killed? NOTHING!

I don't know if it was an illegal assault rifle of that caliber or a hunting rifle (both are made and what's the dif anyhow), but the fact is the bastards wanted to kill and they did. If there were no guns in the world, they would have figured something else out.

When someone is determined to do wrong, they will find the means whether it is legally available or illegal.
 
copied from this link....http://right-thinking.com/index.php/C1/

There Can Be Only One

Last year I blogged on an incident in Australia where a teenager brought a crossbow to school and shot a couple of his fellow students. I jokingly called for Australia to implement strict crossbow control legislation to prevent exactly this type of tragedy from ever happening again. Astonishingly, they did exactly that not too long afterwards.

Well, as if Australia couldn’t go any further into the wacky world of prohibition of everything dangerous, the State of Victoria has now implemented sword control legislation. Wait until you read the quotes from this government official. I swear to God, if I was being facetious and making a joking commentary about sword control I couldn’t make up anything this stupid.

Swords will become prohibited weapons from July 1, carrying penalties of up to $12,000 or six months in prison for illegal use or possession, the Minister for Police and Emergency Services, Andre Haermeyer said today.

Mr Haermeyer announced new sword regulations today, saying they would assist Victoria Police to crack down on incidents involving swords.

“The Bracks Government is implementing these new regulations to help Victoria Police overcome this culture of young people arming themselves with swords,” Mr Haermeyer said.

“From July 1, swords will be made prohibited weapons, making it illegal to use, possess or carry a sword.”

Mr Haermeyer said the elevation of swords from controlled to prohibited weapons would also impact on vendors attempting to sell swords.

“It is illegal to sell prohibited weapons other than in limited circumstances. Vendors will only be legally permitted to sell a sword to an individual who can produce evidence that they fall within an exempt category or have a specific approval from the Chief Commissioner,” he said.

“Vendors will be required to register who they have sold swords to, the nature of the buyers’ exemption and the type of sword or swords.

Here’s some of the choice quotes. Remember, folks, I’m not making this up.

"Legitimate sword owners understand the importance of ensuring that their swords do not fall into the wrong hands,” Mr Haermeyer said. . . .

“It’s clear that the majority of Victorians back the push to keep swords off the streets,” he said.

What’s next? Legislation to ban pointy sticks? How about pieces of broken glass? What about golf clubs, or baseball bats, or cricket wickets, or tire irons? Why not ban all blunt instruments? Of course, then you’d have to ban sharp fingernails, and then even ban anyone from ever making a clenched fist—fists can be deadly weapons, as you know. And while you’re at it, you had better ban all martial arts studios. You can’t have citizens running around knowing how to cause physical harm to anyone else.

I’m simply horrified that Victoria, the state in which I was born and where I still have family, could do something this monumentally asinine. Are there gangs of sword-wielding teenagers roaming the streets in Australia? Is it like a scene from Highlander, where there are sword-waving immortals battling to the death by decapitating each other? Seriously, just how big a problem are sword attacks in Victoria? I know there are Australians who read this website, can someone please enlighten me here?





is this how we want to end up? we shall ban all guns, and then when a man gets killed by a sword we will take those too. murders happened way before guns or even gun powder. If someone wants to kill someone bad enough it will happen folks. when did this world stop holding individuals accountable for their own actions?
 

I think that Clintons ban on Assault weapons did nothing but encourage people to go out and buy before the ban took place. Worked for me. Thats is what I did. I have no need for assault weapon, I dont hunt with it, I rarely shoot it. Heck right now it is stored at my moms in another state because California has there own restrictions. I probably would not even had bought it if it had been for the ban. I just did not want to be the only one without one. There were ships full of these just before the ban just to keep up with the people purchasing theirs before the ban took place. And last time I went to a gun show there were still plenty out there. I think Clinton actually sold more than had the ban not taken place.
 
Bill of rights

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed

Necessary to the security of a free state.
That means without guns, we have no freedom from our own government. No way for the people of this nation to deter and defend against tyranny.

shall not be infringed
Simply written, for a simple reason.

That "ban", a direct violation of our constitutional rights forged by our forefathers, is a threat to our freedom.
 
Oh gawd, are you kidding me...2 gun debates on 2 different threads??? Shoot me now.

Let me preface this by saying: I own a gun, and like guns. I don't want to ban guns, and see no reason for it. And lastly, I agree with most of what has been said for and against on this thread BUT...

Here we go again.
Guns don't kill people, idiots with guns kill people. Are we going to ban kitchen knives and baseball bats, too?
Maybe, so let's ban Idiots from guns. Why not? Hell, I say we ban Idiots from driving and buying alcohol.

There's that word again.... NEED. Do YOU know how to easily convert a semi auto to full auto? I didn't think so,

Easy there partner, I think my man L33TJ33P knows plenty about assault rifles and guns, so maybe your barking up the wrong tree there. :mrgreen:

It's not about NEED. No offense, but you don't NEED a car, you could ride a bike, or even better yet yet the govt get you where you need to go with public transportation. You don't NEED a jeep.

Now keep in mind I agree with you when I say this...
Yes, it's true you don't NEED a car, or a jeep, or a gun. You also don't NEED Heroin. And last time I checked there's a ban against that. You also don't NEED child pornography. Again, that's a no no.

Now, I'm not suggesting that owning firearms is akin to being into child pornography, but the point is the same: It's all a matter of perspective. If the majority of the populace deems an item "harmful", "bad" and "unnecessary", then it's usually banned or outlawed...unless the right people are making money off of it.

>>>>>>>>>>FUMBLE!!! Sorry Pats v. Indy on TV<<<<<<<<<
Anyways,
It's all a matter of where we as a society want that line to be, and we draw lines ALL of the time. Topics and issues on the bubble: cigarrettes, pot, guns, gambling and prostitution. These are issues some argue are okay, and some argue should be banned...all controversial topics.

--For example, You don't NEED cigarrettes they cause cancer, let's ban them. Pot's not THAT bad for you, let's legalize it and tax it. Prostitution is legal in Nevada, why not everywhere? And let's tax that too!
 
TwistedCopper said:
pinko! :lol:
Oh YOU again!!
Hey Facist...what's up!? :lol: Say, how'd you like that game?

C'mon, read the preface...I'm just showing the other side of things... I put in the disclaimer that I don't think guns should be banned!!! Geez. Can't shake off the smell/stigma of patuli with you can I?? And I'm not even a hippie!!!:lol:

BTW - I'll be killing lots of Wild Turkeys this Monday up in ruidoso for turkey camp. AND get to try out the TJ on some real trails.
 

Instead of spending all kinds of taxpayer's money on gun regulation, why not just spend it on gun safety education? I mean, heck, we teach people how to safely use the biggest killers in society, right? You know, cars? Don't see a lot of banning going on there, do ya?
 
If you folks think govt regulations on weapons (local or federal level) dont make a difference you really need to get out of the woods and take a look around at the rest of the country. I grew up in a somewhat urban area and when I started high school in 1994 we had a major problem with weapons and drugs in the school and the surrounding area. It wasnt until the local govt stepped in and (some of you guys better sit down) banned anything that could be considered a weapon. The result was the school cleaned up in one year, something could not be accomplished the 4 years before I was there. Yeah there are problems and exceptions to everything, including laws. One of my friends got suspended for his senior year because he brought a leatherman into school and no that probably wasnt the intent of the law, but the laws and regulations worked on the majority. That give and inch, govt takes a mile thing is ignorant. There are areas of this country that need the govt to step in to make it a better/livable place. While you might be able to handle an assault weapon the are 10 other people who arent that smart. And your a fool if you think a drug dealer wont put up $900 for an assault weapon. I have seen kids buy hand guns at school for $500.
 
judge09 said:
.While you might be able to handle an assault weapon the are 10 other people who arent that smart. .

So who makes the decision? The people trying to ban these things (and other guns) THINK they are smarter than the average american, so THEY know what's better for the average american. They say (as if they were speaking to a child) "you don't need that bad assault rifle". This is what's next. Ban assault rifles, ban handguns, ban all semi autos, ban whatever's left (including crossbows and swords). This has already happened in Australia AND England. Crime is on the rise in both countries. Diane Fienstien and co have flat out said the AWB is a stepping stone on the way to bigger and better things (like a total ban). An armed population is made up of citizens, and unarmed population is made up of subjects.


judge09 said:
.And your a fool if you think a drug dealer wont put up $900 for an assault weapon. I have seen kids buy hand guns at school for $500.
Both transactions are ALREADY ILLEGAL. Enforce the laws in place and quit snatching innocent peoples stuff! Drug dealer weapon of choice is a cheap sawed off shotgun (Walmart, $79 and up) or a POS pistol (jennings etc). There are exceptions to this just like everything else; you're always gonna have crooks with expensive taste. If a drug dealer is going to spend $900 on a gun, he's gonna get a full auto someone smuggled into the country illegally(again, ALREADY ILLEGAL). When the Clinton ban was looming, less that 1/2 of one percent of guns confiscated in crimes in the US that year qualified as an "assault weapon". Again, "these things look scary, and imagine what someone could do with one of those, let's ban them" I love the "high power assault weapon" jab. Most fire a .22 bullet or a very underpowered 30 cal bullet. Rather be hit by those than a 30.06 or other deer rifle.
 

judge09 said:
If you folks think govt regulations on weapons (local or federal level) dont make a difference you really need to get out of the woods and take a look around at the rest of the country. I grew up in a somewhat urban area and when I started high school in 1994 we had a major problem with weapons and drugs in the school and the surrounding area. It wasnt until the local govt stepped in and (some of you guys better sit down) banned anything that could be considered a weapon. The result was the school cleaned up in one year, something could not be accomplished the 4 years before I was there. Yeah there are problems and exceptions to everything, including laws. One of my friends got suspended for his senior year because he brought a leatherman into school and no that probably wasnt the intent of the law, but the laws and regulations worked on the majority. That give and inch, govt takes a mile thing is ignorant. There are areas of this country that need the govt to step in to make it a better/livable place. While you might be able to handle an assault weapon the are 10 other people who arent that smart. And your a fool if you think a drug dealer wont put up $900 for an assault weapon. I have seen kids buy hand guns at school for $500.

So you are saying befor this ban took place, weapons and drugs were ok in your school?

I think not. More likely there was a crackdown on kids violating the rules already in place, or a crackdown on re-written rules that were already in place.

This is what needs to be done everywhere, to crack down on people who ILLEGALLY carry or use firearms, not merely giving probation or light sentances. If there is no accountability for violations, vioaltions will run wild.
 
I agree totally with WM69, I read something the other day about this idiot Kerry wanting to ban any automatic shotgun with a "pistol grip"....the funny thing is they go on to say that a "pistol grip" is defined by an actual pistol grip, thumb hole grip or anything else that can be used as a grip....and the picture he had....was a normal shotgun, no special grip......shows how much these idiots know about guns
 
I love this issue. Not so much talking about it, just listening in. It's one of those 180 degree issues that show just how full of crap the two major political parties are. Suddenly the Republicans are worried about personal freedom and the Democraps are worried about personal responsibility. :lol:


When the man comes to take my guns.....either his wife or mine is going to have to start dating again.
 

When the man comes to take my guns.....either his wife or mine is going to have to start dating again.

that is a great quote there, no man will ever take my guns......unless I'm dead that is
 
Nymisus said:
When the man comes to take my guns.....either his wife or mine is going to have to start dating again.

that is a great quote there, no man will ever take my guns......unless I'm dead that is

Right On! Like I've always said: "They can have my gun when the pry it from my cold dead hand!"

I wasn't the one who penned that statement but it rings true in my household. I don't NEED the guns I have but my Dad, his Dad and I'm sure several more of my family members have fought for the RIGHT, just as our forefathers did, for me to have my gun.

ok...I'm through
 

Here we go again :lol: And this isn't meant to sway anyone, I just thought this was intersting. And as TC said, Stats are like a holes, everybody has one, and everyone can find a stat to back up their agenda.

But, everybody talks about how crime rates are going down in the US and going up everywhere else. Let's shed some prespective on that statement.

Every developed nation has considerably lower numbers of murders than we.
Check this out: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T...=au&id=da&id=fr&id=nl&id=no&id=sp&id=sw&id=sz

That's per capita.
here are the totals:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T...=au&id=da&id=fr&id=nl&id=no&id=sp&id=sw&id=sz

49 murders in Norway?

58 in Denmark?

637 in Japan?

12,658 in the US. Our nearest competitor in this illustrious category was South Korea at 4 times less per capita.

Assaults:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T...=ks&id=nl&id=no&id=sp&id=sw&id=sz&id=uk&id=us

At the numbers we have, there's really nowhere to go but down...

But in overall Crime, all categories considered, we're doing better than many think.
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T...=ks&id=nl&id=no&id=sp&id=sw&id=sz&id=uk&id=us

I guess when we yankees commit crimes, we go big.
Denmark, who had the least amount of murders percapita also has the highest over all crime rate.

....interesting. :?

Numbers must consider whether or not the crime gets reported, but developed nations are pretty consistant. Still interesting.
 
Back
Top