oscardeuce
Active Member
Just remember:
Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my AR-15
Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my AR-15
2nd Amendment limitations...
- Thread starter theclemsonkid
- Start date
darthtang aw
Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3235150
Why a ban on assault weapons? The most common reason is because weapons of those types primarily have one purpose - to be used in a situation where you need multiple rounds for defense, i.e a fire fight in a war. If you're in combat, you want a weapon that you can shoot as fast as you can, and can hold as many bullets possible to keep reloads to a minimum. I wouldn't consider a home invasion a combat situation. You may interpret it that way, but I don't think there's any gun dealer that would recommend an AK-47 or TEC-9 for home defense. Other arguments for owning one of these weapons is because they can be used for target practice. I can agree with that one, considering I've already stated that's one of the uses I had for my AR-15. But at the same time, I have better things to do with $1200+ for that weapon, plus $15.00/box (beats me) that will last maybe 3 minutes if you go nuts at a range. That would validate your 'needs' requirement. If you could guarantee that an assault weapon could only be used for this purpose, I see no reason not to own one. But therein lies the problem. You can't make that guarantee. So do you go with the side of caution and ban them so they can't be used for the purpose we KNOW most people want those weapons for, or do you keep selling them hoping that they won't be used for anything more than target practice or whatever justification a responsible gun owner would want it for?
Again, all your reasons can be attributed to alcohol as well. The primary reason to purchase everclear or 151 is to become drunk. Actually the primary reason to purchase an alcoholic beverage is to become drunk or buzzed. If this weren't the case then non alcoholic brews would suffice.
Since the primary reason is NOT to quench thirst we should ban this. Since so many other beverages out there do this exact job. I see the types of people that wait in line at the liquor store. Constantly talking about how drunk they got the night before and how much "partying" they are going to do tonight. So obviously the bottle of jack and 12 pack of beer is not for thirst quenching....this is why we should ban alcohol.
Your entire response boiled down to "they are not needed". Try again.
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3235150
When I worked with my brother in his shop, I had the opportunity to deal with a variety of individuals who came in looking for the different kinds of guns he sold. I can attest that the one's coming in looking at the semi-auto rifles, you knew exactly what they intended to use them for. It was their attitude, their demeanor, the way they spoke, the way they acted when they held one of these weapons. But as long as they had a valid driver's license, were over the age of 18, and had the cash, we sold it to them.
Back in the 1800s you could go in the general store and just purchase a weapon without any of that info. My point? How long ago was it when you worked in your brothers shop? I am sure the regulations have changed since then. Therefore your point/argument is no longer valid. That is like calling the U.S. a slave state TODAY because over 150 years ago slavery was legal, and the trafficing in people was abundant.regardless of the laws since then.
You keep claiming you can order a fully auto gun off the internet. Prove it, because every gun my dad has purchased from the net had the same restrictions in place as the local shops. He recently purchased a semi-auto assault rifle...the process took him month when it was all said and done.
On a sidenote, notice our illustrious Clemson has posted an ran again. It is obvious this guy does not want to engage in a debate on policy/politics and just wants to get the masses riled up.
http:///forum/post/3235150
Why a ban on assault weapons? The most common reason is because weapons of those types primarily have one purpose - to be used in a situation where you need multiple rounds for defense, i.e a fire fight in a war. If you're in combat, you want a weapon that you can shoot as fast as you can, and can hold as many bullets possible to keep reloads to a minimum. I wouldn't consider a home invasion a combat situation. You may interpret it that way, but I don't think there's any gun dealer that would recommend an AK-47 or TEC-9 for home defense. Other arguments for owning one of these weapons is because they can be used for target practice. I can agree with that one, considering I've already stated that's one of the uses I had for my AR-15. But at the same time, I have better things to do with $1200+ for that weapon, plus $15.00/box (beats me) that will last maybe 3 minutes if you go nuts at a range. That would validate your 'needs' requirement. If you could guarantee that an assault weapon could only be used for this purpose, I see no reason not to own one. But therein lies the problem. You can't make that guarantee. So do you go with the side of caution and ban them so they can't be used for the purpose we KNOW most people want those weapons for, or do you keep selling them hoping that they won't be used for anything more than target practice or whatever justification a responsible gun owner would want it for?
Again, all your reasons can be attributed to alcohol as well. The primary reason to purchase everclear or 151 is to become drunk. Actually the primary reason to purchase an alcoholic beverage is to become drunk or buzzed. If this weren't the case then non alcoholic brews would suffice.
Since the primary reason is NOT to quench thirst we should ban this. Since so many other beverages out there do this exact job. I see the types of people that wait in line at the liquor store. Constantly talking about how drunk they got the night before and how much "partying" they are going to do tonight. So obviously the bottle of jack and 12 pack of beer is not for thirst quenching....this is why we should ban alcohol.
Your entire response boiled down to "they are not needed". Try again.
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3235150
When I worked with my brother in his shop, I had the opportunity to deal with a variety of individuals who came in looking for the different kinds of guns he sold. I can attest that the one's coming in looking at the semi-auto rifles, you knew exactly what they intended to use them for. It was their attitude, their demeanor, the way they spoke, the way they acted when they held one of these weapons. But as long as they had a valid driver's license, were over the age of 18, and had the cash, we sold it to them.
Back in the 1800s you could go in the general store and just purchase a weapon without any of that info. My point? How long ago was it when you worked in your brothers shop? I am sure the regulations have changed since then. Therefore your point/argument is no longer valid. That is like calling the U.S. a slave state TODAY because over 150 years ago slavery was legal, and the trafficing in people was abundant.regardless of the laws since then.
You keep claiming you can order a fully auto gun off the internet. Prove it, because every gun my dad has purchased from the net had the same restrictions in place as the local shops. He recently purchased a semi-auto assault rifle...the process took him month when it was all said and done.
On a sidenote, notice our illustrious Clemson has posted an ran again. It is obvious this guy does not want to engage in a debate on policy/politics and just wants to get the masses riled up.
stdreb27
Active Member
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/3235338
On a sidenote, notice our illustrious Clemson has posted an ran again. It is obvious this guy does not want to engage in a debate on policy/politics and just wants to get the masses riled up.
Hence my football bat comment...
http:///forum/post/3235338
On a sidenote, notice our illustrious Clemson has posted an ran again. It is obvious this guy does not want to engage in a debate on policy/politics and just wants to get the masses riled up.
Hence my football bat comment...
bionicarm
Active Member
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/3235338
Again, all your reasons can be attributed to alcohol as well. The primary reason to purchase everclear or 151 is to become drunk. Actually the primary reason to purchase an alcoholic beverage is to become drunk or buzzed. If this weren't the case then non alcoholic brews would suffice.
Since the primary reason is NOT to quench thirst we should ban this. Since so many other beverages out there do this exact job. I see the types of people that wait in line at the liquor store. Constantly talking about how drunk they got the night before and how much "partying" they are going to do tonight. So obviously the bottle of jack and 12 pack of beer is not for thirst quenching....this is why we should ban alcohol.
Your entire response boiled down to "they are not needed". Try again.
Back in the 1800s you could go in the general store and just purchase a weapon without any of that info. My point? How long ago was it when you worked in your brothers shop? I am sure the regulations have changed since then. Therefore your point/argument is no longer valid. That is like calling the U.S. a slave state TODAY because over 150 years ago slavery was legal, and the trafficing in people was abundant.regardless of the laws since then.
You keep claiming you can order a fully auto gun off the internet. Prove it, because every gun my dad has purchased from the net had the same restrictions in place as the local shops. He recently purchased a semi-auto assault rifle...the process took him month when it was all said and done.
On a sidenote, notice our illustrious Clemson has posted an ran again. It is obvious this guy does not want to engage in a debate on policy/politics and just wants to get the masses riled up.
The regualtions have changed since my brother owned his shop. Back then, there was no waiting period. Once the customer filled out the informational form, show his drivers license, and paid for his weapon, he was out the door. However, the point I was making is valid in the sense of the type of people I saw coming in and purchasing those types of weapons. It was abundantly clear what their intentions were for those weapons. I imagine that hasn't changed much over the years. The only difference now is the person has to wait 3 or 4 days to get the gun before he takes it out and shoots someone with it.
The analogies using alcohol, cars, motorcycles, or sticks to justify owning a gun don't wash with me. A person who wants to use a gun for a criminal act is buying that weapon for the sole purpose of using it to harm someone. A person who drinks in excess or drives a car too fast is not doing it to intentionally hurt someone else. Yes, a drunk driver who hits someone is committing a criminal act. But I have never heard of anyone who gets slammed on alcohol doing it with the sole purpose of getting into their car and purposely running into someone. Accidents happen all the time with individuals driving too fast in their cars or bikes. However, with the exception of some random road rage incidents, you rarely if ever have someone just jump into their car, go driving down the street and playing Deathmatch looking for someone to hit going 120MPH. You don't buy alcohol, cars, SUV's, motorcycles, or golf clubs with the explicit intent to use them to harm someone. And someone who is wanting to commit a criminal act would not choose any of these devices to commit those acts. They would on the other hand choose a gun.
I never said you could purchase a fully automatic weapon off the internet. I have shown sites that sell semi-auto weapons, and they also claim to sell accessories that are listed as 'pre-banned', which I guess are items now deemed illegal after the Brady Bill was passed. I have no clue what the conditions are for purchasing these items. On the sites I have seen, it states they will send the items you purchase from them to a licensed FFL dealer in your vacinty where you will pick them up. I can also find you links to sites that sell documents and 'How To' books on how to convert a semi-auto weapon to a full auto weapon. It's actually not that hard, and I imagine these docs show you step-by-step procedures on how to do it.
http:///forum/post/3235338
Again, all your reasons can be attributed to alcohol as well. The primary reason to purchase everclear or 151 is to become drunk. Actually the primary reason to purchase an alcoholic beverage is to become drunk or buzzed. If this weren't the case then non alcoholic brews would suffice.
Since the primary reason is NOT to quench thirst we should ban this. Since so many other beverages out there do this exact job. I see the types of people that wait in line at the liquor store. Constantly talking about how drunk they got the night before and how much "partying" they are going to do tonight. So obviously the bottle of jack and 12 pack of beer is not for thirst quenching....this is why we should ban alcohol.
Your entire response boiled down to "they are not needed". Try again.
Back in the 1800s you could go in the general store and just purchase a weapon without any of that info. My point? How long ago was it when you worked in your brothers shop? I am sure the regulations have changed since then. Therefore your point/argument is no longer valid. That is like calling the U.S. a slave state TODAY because over 150 years ago slavery was legal, and the trafficing in people was abundant.regardless of the laws since then.
You keep claiming you can order a fully auto gun off the internet. Prove it, because every gun my dad has purchased from the net had the same restrictions in place as the local shops. He recently purchased a semi-auto assault rifle...the process took him month when it was all said and done.
On a sidenote, notice our illustrious Clemson has posted an ran again. It is obvious this guy does not want to engage in a debate on policy/politics and just wants to get the masses riled up.
The regualtions have changed since my brother owned his shop. Back then, there was no waiting period. Once the customer filled out the informational form, show his drivers license, and paid for his weapon, he was out the door. However, the point I was making is valid in the sense of the type of people I saw coming in and purchasing those types of weapons. It was abundantly clear what their intentions were for those weapons. I imagine that hasn't changed much over the years. The only difference now is the person has to wait 3 or 4 days to get the gun before he takes it out and shoots someone with it.
The analogies using alcohol, cars, motorcycles, or sticks to justify owning a gun don't wash with me. A person who wants to use a gun for a criminal act is buying that weapon for the sole purpose of using it to harm someone. A person who drinks in excess or drives a car too fast is not doing it to intentionally hurt someone else. Yes, a drunk driver who hits someone is committing a criminal act. But I have never heard of anyone who gets slammed on alcohol doing it with the sole purpose of getting into their car and purposely running into someone. Accidents happen all the time with individuals driving too fast in their cars or bikes. However, with the exception of some random road rage incidents, you rarely if ever have someone just jump into their car, go driving down the street and playing Deathmatch looking for someone to hit going 120MPH. You don't buy alcohol, cars, SUV's, motorcycles, or golf clubs with the explicit intent to use them to harm someone. And someone who is wanting to commit a criminal act would not choose any of these devices to commit those acts. They would on the other hand choose a gun.
I never said you could purchase a fully automatic weapon off the internet. I have shown sites that sell semi-auto weapons, and they also claim to sell accessories that are listed as 'pre-banned', which I guess are items now deemed illegal after the Brady Bill was passed. I have no clue what the conditions are for purchasing these items. On the sites I have seen, it states they will send the items you purchase from them to a licensed FFL dealer in your vacinty where you will pick them up. I can also find you links to sites that sell documents and 'How To' books on how to convert a semi-auto weapon to a full auto weapon. It's actually not that hard, and I imagine these docs show you step-by-step procedures on how to do it.
reefraff
Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3235352
The regualtions have changed since my brother owned his shop. Back then, there was no waiting period. Once the customer filled out the informational form, show his drivers license, and paid for his weapon, he was out the door. However, the point I was making is valid in the sense of the type of people I saw coming in and purchasing those types of weapons. It was abundantly clear what their intentions were for those weapons. I imagine that hasn't changed much over the years. The only difference now is the person has to wait 3 or 4 days to get the gun before he takes it out and shoots someone with it.
The analogies using alcohol, cars, motorcycles, or sticks to justify owning a gun don't wash with me. A person who wants to use a gun for a criminal act is buying that weapon for the sole purpose of using it to harm someone. A person who drinks in excess or drives a car too fast is not doing it to intentionally hurt someone else. Yes, a drunk driver who hits someone is committing a criminal act. But I have never heard of anyone who gets slammed on alcohol doing it with the sole purpose of getting into their car and purposely running into someone. Accidents happen all the time with individuals driving too fast in their cars or bikes. However, with the exception of some random road rage incidents, you rarely if ever have someone just jump into their car, go driving down the street and playing Deathmatch looking for someone to hit going 120MPH. You don't buy alcohol, cars, SUV's, motorcycles, or golf clubs with the explicit intent to use them to harm someone. And someone who is wanting to commit a criminal act would not choose any of these devices to commit those acts. They would on the other hand choose a gun.
I never said you could purchase a fully automatic weapon off the internet. I have shown sites that sell semi-auto weapons, and they also claim to sell accessories that are listed as 'pre-banned', which I guess are items now deemed illegal after the Brady Bill was passed. I have no clue what the conditions are for purchasing these items. On the sites I have seen, it states they will send the items you purchase from them to a licensed FFL dealer in your vacinty where you will pick them up. I can also find you links to sites that sell documents and 'How To' books on how to convert a semi-auto weapon to a full auto weapon. It's actually not that hard, and I imagine these docs show you step-by-step procedures on how to do it.
But you still go through the exact same background check to take possession of the weapon.
http:///forum/post/3235352
The regualtions have changed since my brother owned his shop. Back then, there was no waiting period. Once the customer filled out the informational form, show his drivers license, and paid for his weapon, he was out the door. However, the point I was making is valid in the sense of the type of people I saw coming in and purchasing those types of weapons. It was abundantly clear what their intentions were for those weapons. I imagine that hasn't changed much over the years. The only difference now is the person has to wait 3 or 4 days to get the gun before he takes it out and shoots someone with it.
The analogies using alcohol, cars, motorcycles, or sticks to justify owning a gun don't wash with me. A person who wants to use a gun for a criminal act is buying that weapon for the sole purpose of using it to harm someone. A person who drinks in excess or drives a car too fast is not doing it to intentionally hurt someone else. Yes, a drunk driver who hits someone is committing a criminal act. But I have never heard of anyone who gets slammed on alcohol doing it with the sole purpose of getting into their car and purposely running into someone. Accidents happen all the time with individuals driving too fast in their cars or bikes. However, with the exception of some random road rage incidents, you rarely if ever have someone just jump into their car, go driving down the street and playing Deathmatch looking for someone to hit going 120MPH. You don't buy alcohol, cars, SUV's, motorcycles, or golf clubs with the explicit intent to use them to harm someone. And someone who is wanting to commit a criminal act would not choose any of these devices to commit those acts. They would on the other hand choose a gun.
I never said you could purchase a fully automatic weapon off the internet. I have shown sites that sell semi-auto weapons, and they also claim to sell accessories that are listed as 'pre-banned', which I guess are items now deemed illegal after the Brady Bill was passed. I have no clue what the conditions are for purchasing these items. On the sites I have seen, it states they will send the items you purchase from them to a licensed FFL dealer in your vacinty where you will pick them up. I can also find you links to sites that sell documents and 'How To' books on how to convert a semi-auto weapon to a full auto weapon. It's actually not that hard, and I imagine these docs show you step-by-step procedures on how to do it.
But you still go through the exact same background check to take possession of the weapon.
oscardeuce
Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3235352
I never said you could purchase a fully automatic weapon off the internet. I have shown sites that sell semi-auto weapons, and they also claim to sell accessories that are listed as 'pre-banned', which I guess are items now deemed illegal after the Brady Bill was passed. I have no clue what the conditions are for purchasing these items. On the sites I have seen, it states they will send the items you purchase from them to a licensed FFL dealer in your vacinty where you will pick them up. I can also find you links to sites that sell documents and 'How To' books on how to convert a semi-auto weapon to a full auto weapon. It's actually not that hard, and I imagine these docs show you step-by-step procedures on how to do it.
Go ahead, mod your semi to full auto. I'll be happy to write you in Club Fed.
Owning a gun is a responsibility along with a right.
Teddy has still killed more people than I have.
http:///forum/post/3235352
I never said you could purchase a fully automatic weapon off the internet. I have shown sites that sell semi-auto weapons, and they also claim to sell accessories that are listed as 'pre-banned', which I guess are items now deemed illegal after the Brady Bill was passed. I have no clue what the conditions are for purchasing these items. On the sites I have seen, it states they will send the items you purchase from them to a licensed FFL dealer in your vacinty where you will pick them up. I can also find you links to sites that sell documents and 'How To' books on how to convert a semi-auto weapon to a full auto weapon. It's actually not that hard, and I imagine these docs show you step-by-step procedures on how to do it.
Go ahead, mod your semi to full auto. I'll be happy to write you in Club Fed.
Owning a gun is a responsibility along with a right.
Teddy has still killed more people than I have.
darthtang aw
Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3235352
The regualtions have changed since my brother owned his shop. Back then, there was no waiting period. Once the customer filled out the informational form, show his drivers license, and paid for his weapon, he was out the door. However, the point I was making is valid in the sense of the type of people I saw coming in and purchasing those types of weapons. It was abundantly clear what their intentions were for those weapons. I imagine that hasn't changed much over the years. The only difference now is the person has to wait 3 or 4 days to get the gun before he takes it out and shoots someone with it.
The analogies using alcohol, cars, motorcycles, or sticks to justify owning a gun don't wash with me. A person who wants to use a gun for a criminal act is buying that weapon for the sole purpose of using it to harm someone. A person who drinks in excess or drives a car too fast is not doing it to intentionally hurt someone else. Yes, a drunk driver who hits someone is committing a criminal act. But I have never heard of anyone who gets slammed on alcohol doing it with the sole purpose of getting into their car and purposely running into someone. Accidents happen all the time with individuals driving too fast in their cars or bikes. However, with the exception of some random road rage incidents, you rarely if ever have someone just jump into their car, go driving down the street and playing Deathmatch looking for someone to hit going 120MPH. You don't buy alcohol, cars, SUV's, motorcycles, or golf clubs with the explicit intent to use them to harm someone. And someone who is wanting to commit a criminal act would not choose any of these devices to commit those acts. They would on the other hand choose a gun.
I never said you could purchase a fully automatic weapon off the internet. I have shown sites that sell semi-auto weapons, and they also claim to sell accessories that are listed as 'pre-banned', which I guess are items now deemed illegal after the Brady Bill was passed. I have no clue what the conditions are for purchasing these items. On the sites I have seen, it states they will send the items you purchase from them to a licensed FFL dealer in your vacinty where you will pick them up. I can also find you links to sites that sell documents and 'How To' books on how to convert a semi-auto weapon to a full auto weapon. It's actually not that hard, and I imagine these docs show you step-by-step procedures on how to do it.
ANY PERSON that willingly gets in a vehicle and drives under the influence of alcohol has made the CHOICE to violate the law and place other's at risk. Is it their intent to harm, no. But it is their CHOICE to voluntary put the lives of innocent people in danger with NO CONTROL if it occurs or not. To me, this is far worse than the off chance someone uses an assault rifle in a crime.
What percentage of crimes are committed with assault rifles? Of those crimes, what percentage are purchased legally?
To support your argument you need to have these two statistics. I am willing to bet if a "reduction in crime and loss of life" is the main goal....a ban on these would not help. As the criminals will still purchase them illegally or just "legally" purchase a different gun.
Your little reference to when you worked at your brother's gun shop, was made with the intent to show there are no restrictions. Otherwise, you would have left out the part of what was required back then. As it has no bearing on the current conversation. It was just a weak attempt to show how "easy" assault rifle purchases.
The claim to make things safer is unjustified. Since we did have an assault weapons ban for good period of time. The national average for crimes committed with assault weapons was 1%. The percentage stayed the same after the ban. And has stayed the same since the ban was lifted. So what does this tell you about the greater majority of AW crimes? What does this tell you about their use in crimes even with a ban?
http:///forum/post/3235352
The regualtions have changed since my brother owned his shop. Back then, there was no waiting period. Once the customer filled out the informational form, show his drivers license, and paid for his weapon, he was out the door. However, the point I was making is valid in the sense of the type of people I saw coming in and purchasing those types of weapons. It was abundantly clear what their intentions were for those weapons. I imagine that hasn't changed much over the years. The only difference now is the person has to wait 3 or 4 days to get the gun before he takes it out and shoots someone with it.
The analogies using alcohol, cars, motorcycles, or sticks to justify owning a gun don't wash with me. A person who wants to use a gun for a criminal act is buying that weapon for the sole purpose of using it to harm someone. A person who drinks in excess or drives a car too fast is not doing it to intentionally hurt someone else. Yes, a drunk driver who hits someone is committing a criminal act. But I have never heard of anyone who gets slammed on alcohol doing it with the sole purpose of getting into their car and purposely running into someone. Accidents happen all the time with individuals driving too fast in their cars or bikes. However, with the exception of some random road rage incidents, you rarely if ever have someone just jump into their car, go driving down the street and playing Deathmatch looking for someone to hit going 120MPH. You don't buy alcohol, cars, SUV's, motorcycles, or golf clubs with the explicit intent to use them to harm someone. And someone who is wanting to commit a criminal act would not choose any of these devices to commit those acts. They would on the other hand choose a gun.
I never said you could purchase a fully automatic weapon off the internet. I have shown sites that sell semi-auto weapons, and they also claim to sell accessories that are listed as 'pre-banned', which I guess are items now deemed illegal after the Brady Bill was passed. I have no clue what the conditions are for purchasing these items. On the sites I have seen, it states they will send the items you purchase from them to a licensed FFL dealer in your vacinty where you will pick them up. I can also find you links to sites that sell documents and 'How To' books on how to convert a semi-auto weapon to a full auto weapon. It's actually not that hard, and I imagine these docs show you step-by-step procedures on how to do it.
ANY PERSON that willingly gets in a vehicle and drives under the influence of alcohol has made the CHOICE to violate the law and place other's at risk. Is it their intent to harm, no. But it is their CHOICE to voluntary put the lives of innocent people in danger with NO CONTROL if it occurs or not. To me, this is far worse than the off chance someone uses an assault rifle in a crime.
What percentage of crimes are committed with assault rifles? Of those crimes, what percentage are purchased legally?
To support your argument you need to have these two statistics. I am willing to bet if a "reduction in crime and loss of life" is the main goal....a ban on these would not help. As the criminals will still purchase them illegally or just "legally" purchase a different gun.
Your little reference to when you worked at your brother's gun shop, was made with the intent to show there are no restrictions. Otherwise, you would have left out the part of what was required back then. As it has no bearing on the current conversation. It was just a weak attempt to show how "easy" assault rifle purchases.
The claim to make things safer is unjustified. Since we did have an assault weapons ban for good period of time. The national average for crimes committed with assault weapons was 1%. The percentage stayed the same after the ban. And has stayed the same since the ban was lifted. So what does this tell you about the greater majority of AW crimes? What does this tell you about their use in crimes even with a ban?
darthtang aw
Active Member
Originally Posted by oscardeuce
http:///forum/post/3235389
Go ahead, mod your semi to full auto. I'll be happy to write you in Club Fed.
Owning a gun is a responsibility along with a right.
Teddy has still killed more people than I have.
Don't you have to receive permission from the National treasury to own a fully automatic weapon?
http:///forum/post/3235389
Go ahead, mod your semi to full auto. I'll be happy to write you in Club Fed.
Owning a gun is a responsibility along with a right.
Teddy has still killed more people than I have.
Don't you have to receive permission from the National treasury to own a fully automatic weapon?
darthtang aw
Active Member
Oh, I also forgot, Bionic, your 3 to 4 day waiting period is also wrong. It is 5 days with some states having increased that anywhere from 10-30 days.
Seriously......use TRUE, CURRENT facts to validate your points.
Seriously......use TRUE, CURRENT facts to validate your points.
yearofthenick
Active Member
At least for me in CA I have to wait 10 days after purchase for ANY gun to clear. If it's a handgun, I need to take a certification test for handgun safety and I'm not allowed to purchase another handgun for 30 days after the purchase of the first one.
J
jstdv8
Guest
I don't think here in AK there is any waiting period for gun purchases except handguns.
I bought a new semi-auto 10-22LR and a shotgun last year and both I walked in gave them the info for the background check. he called it in, within 20 minutes I was walking out with a new purchase.
of course these arent considered assult weapons I guess, Just sayin'
I bought a new semi-auto 10-22LR and a shotgun last year and both I walked in gave them the info for the background check. he called it in, within 20 minutes I was walking out with a new purchase.
of course these arent considered assult weapons I guess, Just sayin'
darthtang aw
Active Member
Originally Posted by Jstdv8
http:///forum/post/3235413
I don't think here in AK there is any waiting period for gun purchases except handguns.
I bought a new semi-auto 10-22LR and a shotgun last year and both I walked in gave them the info for the background check. he called it in, within 20 minutes I was walking out with a new purchase.
of course these arent considered assult weapons I guess, Just sayin'
Only handguns and assault weapons have waiting periods in most states. Rifles and shotguns only have waiting periods in a few, such as california. The call in was for the state background/offenders check .
http:///forum/post/3235413
I don't think here in AK there is any waiting period for gun purchases except handguns.
I bought a new semi-auto 10-22LR and a shotgun last year and both I walked in gave them the info for the background check. he called it in, within 20 minutes I was walking out with a new purchase.
of course these arent considered assult weapons I guess, Just sayin'
Only handguns and assault weapons have waiting periods in most states. Rifles and shotguns only have waiting periods in a few, such as california. The call in was for the state background/offenders check .
bionicarm
Active Member
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/3235397
Oh, I also forgot, Bionic, your 3 to 4 day waiting period is also wrong. It is 5 days with some states having increased that anywhere from 10-30 days.
Seriously......use TRUE, CURRENT facts to validate your points.
That was just a guess. I haven't purchased a gun or been in a gun shop in ages. I know there's some waiting period for purchasing a gun. Sorry I didn't take 5 minutes to look it up.
http:///forum/post/3235397
Oh, I also forgot, Bionic, your 3 to 4 day waiting period is also wrong. It is 5 days with some states having increased that anywhere from 10-30 days.
Seriously......use TRUE, CURRENT facts to validate your points.
That was just a guess. I haven't purchased a gun or been in a gun shop in ages. I know there's some waiting period for purchasing a gun. Sorry I didn't take 5 minutes to look it up.
darthtang aw
Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3235418
That was just a guess. I haven't purchased a gun or been in a gun shop in ages. I know there's some waiting period for purchasing a gun. Sorry I didn't take 5 minutes to look it up.
How can a person formulate an uneducated opinion/belief when you don't even know the law and what is legal or not?............50% of the points for your position have been shown as wrong.
I didn't look them up, my memory retention is just solid. Must be your old age.
But anyway. I am still waiting for a reason other than "not needed" as to why ban them.
http:///forum/post/3235418
That was just a guess. I haven't purchased a gun or been in a gun shop in ages. I know there's some waiting period for purchasing a gun. Sorry I didn't take 5 minutes to look it up.
How can a person formulate an uneducated opinion/belief when you don't even know the law and what is legal or not?............50% of the points for your position have been shown as wrong.
I didn't look them up, my memory retention is just solid. Must be your old age.
But anyway. I am still waiting for a reason other than "not needed" as to why ban them.
bionicarm
Active Member
Originally Posted by oscardeuce
http:///forum/post/3235389
Go ahead, mod your semi to full auto. I'll be happy to write you in Club Fed.
Owning a gun is a responsibility along with a right.
Teddy has still killed more people than I have.
Dude. People who modify semi-autos to autos aren't considered responsible gun owners these days. Back in the late 70's and early 80's, it wasn't a crime to own them. That changed with the Firearm Owners Protection Act in 1986. My brother still has an original Army-issued Thompson Machine Gun he purchased from a dealer at a gun show. People who modify semi-autos today are doing it for one purpose - major damage and firepower for a crime.
http:///forum/post/3235389
Go ahead, mod your semi to full auto. I'll be happy to write you in Club Fed.
Owning a gun is a responsibility along with a right.
Teddy has still killed more people than I have.
Dude. People who modify semi-autos to autos aren't considered responsible gun owners these days. Back in the late 70's and early 80's, it wasn't a crime to own them. That changed with the Firearm Owners Protection Act in 1986. My brother still has an original Army-issued Thompson Machine Gun he purchased from a dealer at a gun show. People who modify semi-autos today are doing it for one purpose - major damage and firepower for a crime.
darthtang aw
Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3235422
Dude. People who modify semi-autos to autos aren't considered responsible gun owners these days. Back in the late 70's and early 80's, it wasn't a crime to own them. That changed with the Firearm Owners Protection Act in 1986. My brother still has an original Army-issued Thompson Machine Gun he purchased from a dealer at a gun show. People who modify semi-autos today are doing it for one purpose - major damage and firepower for a crime.
Thanks for calling my father, uncle, and brother criminals...........way to stereotype..........
http:///forum/post/3235422
Dude. People who modify semi-autos to autos aren't considered responsible gun owners these days. Back in the late 70's and early 80's, it wasn't a crime to own them. That changed with the Firearm Owners Protection Act in 1986. My brother still has an original Army-issued Thompson Machine Gun he purchased from a dealer at a gun show. People who modify semi-autos today are doing it for one purpose - major damage and firepower for a crime.
Thanks for calling my father, uncle, and brother criminals...........way to stereotype..........
bionicarm
Active Member
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/3235394
ANY PERSON that willingly gets in a vehicle and drives under the influence of alcohol has made the CHOICE to violate the law and place other's at risk. Is it their intent to harm, no. But it is their CHOICE to voluntary put the lives of innocent people in danger with NO CONTROL if it occurs or not. To me, this is far worse than the off chance someone uses an assault rifle in a crime.
What percentage of crimes are committed with assault rifles? Of those crimes, what percentage are purchased legally?
To support your argument you need to have these two statistics. I am willing to bet if a "reduction in crime and loss of life" is the main goal....a ban on these would not help. As the criminals will still purchase them illegally or just "legally" purchase a different gun.
Your little reference to when you worked at your brother's gun shop, was made with the intent to show there are no restrictions. Otherwise, you would have left out the part of what was required back then. As it has no bearing on the current conversation. It was just a weak attempt to show how "easy" assault rifle purchases.
The claim to make things safer is unjustified. Since we did have an assault weapons ban for good period of time. The national average for crimes committed with assault weapons was 1%. The percentage stayed the same after the ban. And has stayed the same since the ban was lifted. So what does this tell you about the greater majority of AW crimes? What does this tell you about their use in crimes even with a ban?
Most deadly accidents caused by a drunk driver are those committed by someone that is drunk to the point where that don't even realize they are doing anything wrong. Their logical reasoning is completely impaired. I was a juror once for a DUI case where a girl ran over a cop directing traffic. She stated she didn't recall even gettig into her car when she left the bar she was drinking at. None of her friends attempted to stop her. We gave her 10 years in prison. She would've gotten more, but the officer only sustained minor injuries.
You're using statistics that can't be backed up. When a deadly crime occurs, and no weapon is retrieved, how do the cops know whether the weapon used was an assault weapon or not? I HAVEN'T LOOKED IT UP, but if I'm not mistaken, pretty much every assault-type weapon uses the same ammo as any other gun not classified as an assault weapon. So unless the person committing the crime leaves behind 30 or 40 shell casings, how could they determine the criminal used a TEC-9 or a semi-auto pistol while committing the crime?
The references I was making about working at my brother's shop had nothing to do about restrictions. It was my observation of the type of individuals who came in and purchased assault-type weapons. Who knows what percentage of assault-weapon crimes were committed using legal or illegal weapons? That question isn't on any forms I know of when you purchase a weapon:
Do you intend to use this weapon in illegal activity or a crime?
If it is, do you think someone would answer that question honestly and with a straight face?
http:///forum/post/3235394
ANY PERSON that willingly gets in a vehicle and drives under the influence of alcohol has made the CHOICE to violate the law and place other's at risk. Is it their intent to harm, no. But it is their CHOICE to voluntary put the lives of innocent people in danger with NO CONTROL if it occurs or not. To me, this is far worse than the off chance someone uses an assault rifle in a crime.
What percentage of crimes are committed with assault rifles? Of those crimes, what percentage are purchased legally?
To support your argument you need to have these two statistics. I am willing to bet if a "reduction in crime and loss of life" is the main goal....a ban on these would not help. As the criminals will still purchase them illegally or just "legally" purchase a different gun.
Your little reference to when you worked at your brother's gun shop, was made with the intent to show there are no restrictions. Otherwise, you would have left out the part of what was required back then. As it has no bearing on the current conversation. It was just a weak attempt to show how "easy" assault rifle purchases.
The claim to make things safer is unjustified. Since we did have an assault weapons ban for good period of time. The national average for crimes committed with assault weapons was 1%. The percentage stayed the same after the ban. And has stayed the same since the ban was lifted. So what does this tell you about the greater majority of AW crimes? What does this tell you about their use in crimes even with a ban?
Most deadly accidents caused by a drunk driver are those committed by someone that is drunk to the point where that don't even realize they are doing anything wrong. Their logical reasoning is completely impaired. I was a juror once for a DUI case where a girl ran over a cop directing traffic. She stated she didn't recall even gettig into her car when she left the bar she was drinking at. None of her friends attempted to stop her. We gave her 10 years in prison. She would've gotten more, but the officer only sustained minor injuries.
You're using statistics that can't be backed up. When a deadly crime occurs, and no weapon is retrieved, how do the cops know whether the weapon used was an assault weapon or not? I HAVEN'T LOOKED IT UP, but if I'm not mistaken, pretty much every assault-type weapon uses the same ammo as any other gun not classified as an assault weapon. So unless the person committing the crime leaves behind 30 or 40 shell casings, how could they determine the criminal used a TEC-9 or a semi-auto pistol while committing the crime?
The references I was making about working at my brother's shop had nothing to do about restrictions. It was my observation of the type of individuals who came in and purchased assault-type weapons. Who knows what percentage of assault-weapon crimes were committed using legal or illegal weapons? That question isn't on any forms I know of when you purchase a weapon:
Do you intend to use this weapon in illegal activity or a crime?
If it is, do you think someone would answer that question honestly and with a straight face?
bionicarm
Active Member
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/3235424
Thanks for calling my father, uncle, and brother criminals...........way to stereotype..........
Your father, uncle, and brother are modifying semi-autos and making them fully automatic weapons? Why?
http:///forum/post/3235424
Thanks for calling my father, uncle, and brother criminals...........way to stereotype..........
Your father, uncle, and brother are modifying semi-autos and making them fully automatic weapons? Why?
oscardeuce
Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3235422
Dude. People who modify semi-autos to autos aren't considered responsible gun owners these days. Back in the late 70's and early 80's, it wasn't a crime to own them. That changed with the Firearm Owners Protection Act in 1986. My brother still has an original Army-issued Thompson Machine Gun he purchased from a dealer at a gun show. People who modify semi-autos today are doing it for one purpose - major damage and firepower for a crime.
I thought the National Firearms Act of 1934 made clas III illegal to own without the tax stamp/registration with the NFA. The way I understand the 1986 law, they were willing to give amnesty to register and tax all the machine guns out in peoples' garages and attics.
If your brother still has that class III Thompson, he's in trouble unless he amnesty registered it in 1986. He's not being very responsible is he?
http:///forum/post/3235422
Dude. People who modify semi-autos to autos aren't considered responsible gun owners these days. Back in the late 70's and early 80's, it wasn't a crime to own them. That changed with the Firearm Owners Protection Act in 1986. My brother still has an original Army-issued Thompson Machine Gun he purchased from a dealer at a gun show. People who modify semi-autos today are doing it for one purpose - major damage and firepower for a crime.
I thought the National Firearms Act of 1934 made clas III illegal to own without the tax stamp/registration with the NFA. The way I understand the 1986 law, they were willing to give amnesty to register and tax all the machine guns out in peoples' garages and attics.
If your brother still has that class III Thompson, he's in trouble unless he amnesty registered it in 1986. He's not being very responsible is he?
bionicarm
Active Member
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/3235421
How can a person formulate an uneducated opinion/belief when you don't even know the law and what is legal or not?............50% of the points for your position have been shown as wrong.
I didn't look them up, my memory retention is just solid. Must be your old age.
But anyway. I am still waiting for a reason other than "not needed" as to why ban them.
What '50% of my positions' are shown wrong? I haven't dealt with guns for over 30 years. I'm just stating my experiences I had back when I did mess with them. Sorry I don't look up every little useless statistic to back up what I state. Most of your replies are just subjective statements based on your personal beliefs.
The only justification for banning any weapon is based on the trust the American people have with people today being responsible enough to own them. If you could guaranteee that every owner of ANY gun, regardless if it's an assault weapon or not, would maintain and use that weapon in a responsible and safe manner, then there would be no reason whatsoever to ban them. The problem is you can't do that. Excess drinking then driving, driving cars and motorcycles fast, or swinging a golf club at someone - those instruments aren't intentionally used to harm another individual. They can be used for that purpose, but that's not their primary use. A firearm's primary purpose is to dibilitate or kill whatever it is directed towards when fired. Yea, yea, you can say they are also used for target practice, but you and I both know that's not what most people by a gun for. A gun in almost every case is purchased for personal protection or hunting. Advocates of banning any firearm are on that bandwagon because they fear that individual who isn't responsible, and owns a firearm for the sole intent purpose of using it to commit a crime. Most of them are on that bandwagon because either they, or someone they know, was hurt or killed by someone using a firearm. Just like most people who join MADD or advocate against drunk drivers. Someone they loved was harmed by someone driving drunk. Unless you can guarantee 100% that no harm would come to someone by an individual who purchases a gun, you will always have someone who will want gun ownership banned.
http:///forum/post/3235421
How can a person formulate an uneducated opinion/belief when you don't even know the law and what is legal or not?............50% of the points for your position have been shown as wrong.
I didn't look them up, my memory retention is just solid. Must be your old age.
But anyway. I am still waiting for a reason other than "not needed" as to why ban them.
What '50% of my positions' are shown wrong? I haven't dealt with guns for over 30 years. I'm just stating my experiences I had back when I did mess with them. Sorry I don't look up every little useless statistic to back up what I state. Most of your replies are just subjective statements based on your personal beliefs.
The only justification for banning any weapon is based on the trust the American people have with people today being responsible enough to own them. If you could guaranteee that every owner of ANY gun, regardless if it's an assault weapon or not, would maintain and use that weapon in a responsible and safe manner, then there would be no reason whatsoever to ban them. The problem is you can't do that. Excess drinking then driving, driving cars and motorcycles fast, or swinging a golf club at someone - those instruments aren't intentionally used to harm another individual. They can be used for that purpose, but that's not their primary use. A firearm's primary purpose is to dibilitate or kill whatever it is directed towards when fired. Yea, yea, you can say they are also used for target practice, but you and I both know that's not what most people by a gun for. A gun in almost every case is purchased for personal protection or hunting. Advocates of banning any firearm are on that bandwagon because they fear that individual who isn't responsible, and owns a firearm for the sole intent purpose of using it to commit a crime. Most of them are on that bandwagon because either they, or someone they know, was hurt or killed by someone using a firearm. Just like most people who join MADD or advocate against drunk drivers. Someone they loved was harmed by someone driving drunk. Unless you can guarantee 100% that no harm would come to someone by an individual who purchases a gun, you will always have someone who will want gun ownership banned.