Great time to be in public schools in San Antonio

aggiealum

aggiealum

Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///t/397599/great-time-to-be-in-public-schools-in-san-antonio/40#post_3544547
If they have been available for years (which they have in other forms such as the hell fire) why is it they haven't been reported used in any crimes if they are such a bad thing? I can modify a flare and propane bottle into something a lot more lethal, are we going to ban them too?
Yet another idiotic rationalization as to why they shouldn't be banned, or we should restrict their sales. Yes, there's a multitude of other devices that can be used to commit a crime. It's impossible to protect yourself from harm from any inanimate object if some inventive nutjob can find a way to use it. But if you can deter or eliminate the possibility of having yet another mass shooting occurring because anyone wanting to commit that kind of act knows that an assault rifle is the "weapon of choice" to get the most successful results, why not make it harder for them to get it? It could be the catalyst to deter them enough from choosing another weapon. We'll never know because no one in Congress has the balls to go through with it.
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
LOL.  Sop now you're a magazine expert and you can tell the difference between a 17-round and 15-round mag by looking at a picture?  You're talking two extra bullets.  I think the 17-round is about a 1/2 inch longer if that.  If it will shut you up on the subject, I have no problem posting a picture. a person can tell. Please post it in the box. This I have to see, since I have never seen nor heard of this occurring. It is more the curiosity factor now.
You and your NRA-lovin cohorts who are against assault weapons bans keep saying that most crimes committed with firearms aren't done with assault rifles because they aren't "practical" for those types of crimes.  So of course "poor people" would be more inclined to use a more "economical" firearm to commit whatever crimes they plan committed with a gun in their hand.  $900 is considered expensive for purchasing a firearm?  Like I said, I paid $479 for my Taurus, and that was on sale.  If it's so "expensive" to have these assault weapons, then why have they been the weapon of choice for the last two or three mass murders? 
900 is the average price of the less expensive ones. If poor people had 900 dollars laying around they wouldn't need subsidized healthcare, food stamps, etc.
You haven't seen any bump fire stocks used yet because they haven't been glorified by the gun nuts at the gun shows.
Yes they have. Honestly I wouldn't care if these were banned, but to do so you need to change ATF interpretation law.
Ten years ago, you'd go to a gun show and you'd only have one or two dealers selling a couple variations of an AR, SKS, or Bushmaster.  As soon as Obama came into office, you go to a show and every dealer has 10 different flavors of assault-type rifles laid out on the table with every known accessory, including rail kits, drums, fancy optics, and even silencers. 
Because I am sure you have attended a ton of gun shows. However ten years ago you didn't see AR15, sks, or Bushmasters (an ar-15) at gun shows. I will let you figure out why. It had nothing to do with Obama...
It's only a matter of time one or more dealers will begin hawking these bump fire stocks, and as more variations of the stock come available, the prices will go down. 
Click to expand...
They have been around almost as long as the Bushmaster. Prices are only going up.
Do you honestly think someone wanting to kill as many people as possible cares about the accuracy of that firearm?  Most of the time, they're just shooting at anything that moves.  The Aurora theater shooter wasn't standing there picking targets to shoot.  He was in a dark theater with smoke all around shooting anything that moved.  If he'd had a bump fire stock, the body count would've been twice what it was. 
Click to expand...
Explain how, especially since his AR jammed due to a crappy magazine drum.
Someone who actually wants to go through with an act such as this could care less how much money it's going to cost to do it.  Nine chances out of ten, they know they're not going to live through the endeavor.  So if they have to drop and few hundreds dollars more, why do they care?  They're not going to be around to spend on anything else.
Click to expand...
three hundred dollars for a slide fire stock or three hundred dollars for magazines and ammunition? But as I stated, I have no issue banning the 100 round drum or the slide fire stock.
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
Yet another idiotic rationalization as to why they shouldn't be banned, or we should restrict their sales.  Yes, there's a multitude of other devices that can be used to commit a crime.  It's impossible to protect yourself from harm from any inanimate object if some inventive nutjob can find a way to use it.  But if you can deter or eliminate the possibility of having yet another mass shooting occurring because anyone wanting to commit that kind of act knows that an assault rifle is the "weapon of choice" to get the most successful results, why not make it harder for them to get it?  It could be the catalyst to deter them enough from choosing another weapon.  We'll never know because no one in Congress has the balls to go through with it.
Ok, so lets say we ban the assault weapon. And mass shootings continue (as they did during the ban) What then?
 
aggiealum

aggiealum

Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/397599/great-time-to-be-in-public-schools-in-san-antonio/60#post_3544566
Ok, so lets say we ban the assault weapon. And mass shootings continue (as they did during the ban) What then?
The Federal Assault Weapons Ban was a joke. The only firearms that fit the description of "assault weapon" in that ban, had to fit the following criteria:

Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:
Folding or telescoping stock
Pistol grip
Bayonet mount
Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
Grenade launcher mount
Semi-automatic pistols with detachable magazines and two or more of the following:
Magazine that attaches outside the pistol grip
Threaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppressor, handgrip, or suppressor
Barrel shroud safety feature that prevents burns to the operator
Unloaded weight of 50 oz (1.4 kg) or more
A semi-automatic version of a fully automatic firearm.
Semi-automatic shotguns with two or more of the following: Folding or telescoping stock
Pistol grip
Fixed capacity of more than 5 rounds
Detachable magazine.

Gun dealers simply sold semi-autos that didn't have these features on them. So to say that all assault weapons were banned is ridiculous.

Ban them altogether with no exceptions, then show me the statistics.
 
aggiealum

aggiealum

Member
Disaster averted here, but please tell me how a 17 year old kid could amass these items for his planned reenactment of Columbine?

LaDue, who is charged with attempted murder and explosives in connection with the alleged plot, amassed a frightening arsenal over a nine-month period, including an SKS assault rifle with 400 rounds of ammunition, a 9mm Beretta handgun with ammunition and at least six homemade bombs, according to the affidavit by Waseca police Capt. Kris Markeson.

In addition to the guns, police recovered an array of bomb-making and related gear at LaDue’s home and the storage locker. Other items included various containers of ball bearings, a pressure cooker, three boxes of Remington 12-gauge shotgun shells, military trip wire, a ski mask and a black duster/trench coat. Three 5-pound bags of potassium perchlorate and a 10-pound bag of red iron oxide were among the array of chemicals recovered, as well.


http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/minnesota-teen-methodically-plotted-carnage-three-acts-police-say-n95736
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
Disaster averted here, but please tell me how a 17 year old kid could amass these items for his planned reenactment of Columbine?
LaDue, who is charged with attempted murder and explosives in connection with the alleged plot, amassed a frightening arsenal over a nine-month period, including an SKS assault rifle with 400 rounds of ammunition, a 9mm Beretta handgun with ammunition and at least six homemade bombs, according to the affidavit by Waseca police Capt. Kris Markeson.
In addition to the guns, police recovered an array of bomb-making and related gear at LaDue’s home and the storage locker. Other items included various containers of ball bearings, a pressure cooker, three boxes of Remington 12-gauge shotgun shells, military trip wire, a ski mask and a black duster/trench coat. Three 5-pound bags of potassium perchlorate and a 10-pound bag of red iron oxide were among the array of chemicals recovered, as well.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/minnesota-teen-methodically-plotted-carnage-three-acts-police-say-n95736
I wonder if there have been any reported home break ins in the area. I lived in Minnesota for years. That is a pretty rural area....so someone breaking into homes and stealing firearms would not go unnoticed.
My question is, why do kids want to do these types of acts. What gets them to this point? As a rational human being I can not fathom where the desire comes from.
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
The Federal Assault Weapons Ban was a joke.  The only firearms that fit the description of "assault weapon" in that ban, had to fit the following criteria:
Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:
Folding or telescoping stock
Pistol grip
Bayonet mount
Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
Grenade launcher mount
 
Semi-automatic pistols with detachable magazines and two or more of the following:
Magazine that attaches outside the pistol grip
Threaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppressor, handgrip, or suppressor
Barrel shroud safety feature that prevents burns to the operator
Unloaded weight of 50 oz (1.4 kg) or more
A semi-automatic version of a fully automatic firearm.
 
Semi-automatic shotguns with two or more of the following: Folding or telescoping stock
Pistol grip
Fixed capacity of more than 5 rounds
Detachable magazine.
Gun dealers simply sold semi-autos that didn't have these features on them.  So to say that all assault weapons were banned is ridiculous.
Ban them altogether with no exceptions, then show me the statistics.
what classifies as an assault weapon?
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member

My definition is any semi-automatic firearm capable of holding 30 rounds or more. 
Then sell your handgun my friend. As it is capable of holding a 30 round magazine. You own an assault weapon.
Here's your picture:
Click to expand...
could you make it any smaller. I will try to blow it up from home. One of those magazines is an aftermarket magazine. What year did you purchase the gun?
 
aggiealum

aggiealum

Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/397599/great-time-to-be-in-public-schools-in-san-antonio/60#post_3544576
what classifies as an assault weapon?
My definition is any firearm that has semi-automatic capability that can hold a magazine larger than 30 rounds. In most cases, these same firearms can be converted to full auto capability whether it's legal to do so or not.

Here's your picture:



Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/397599/great-time-to-be-in-public-schools-in-san-antonio/60#post_3544582
Then sell your handgun my friend. As it is capable of holding a 30 round magazine. You own an assault weapon.
could you make it any smaller. I will try to blow it up from home. One of those magazines is definitely an aftermarket magazine not manufactured by taurus
You're right it does. Didn't know it until after I bought it. If my wife knew it was capable of holding that size magazine, I assure you she wouldn't have selected it. When I go postal, 'll be sure to remember you reminded me of that fact. Thanks.

Took the picture with my cell phone, downloaded it as a large picture on this site. I'm not wasting my time blowing it up for your convenience.

Both of those magazines were inside the closed Taurus manufactured box. The gun and mags were inside the hard plastic case that came with the gun. So how an aftermarket magazine magically got inside their package is news to me.

And before you ask what's on the end of the grip:

http://defensiveoperatorsgrip.com/users/awp.php?ln=714738
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by AggieAlum http:///t/397599/great-time-to-be-in-public-schools-in-san-antonio/60#post_3544556
Yet another idiotic rationalization as to why they shouldn't be banned, or we should restrict their sales. Yes, there's a multitude of other devices that can be used to commit a crime. It's impossible to protect yourself from harm from any inanimate object if some inventive nutjob can find a way to use it. But if you can deter or eliminate the possibility of having yet another mass shooting occurring because anyone wanting to commit that kind of act knows that an assault rifle is the "weapon of choice" to get the most successful results, why not make it harder for them to get it? It could be the catalyst to deter them enough from choosing another weapon. We'll never know because no one in Congress has the balls to go through with it.

Wait, so we have a product that has never been misused but in your paranoid little mind we should ban them? More people are killed in cars and swimming pools each year than by guns so, Perhaps we should ban small rolling coffin cars and require all swimming pools to have a certified lifeguard. After all it is about saving lives right???
 
bang guy

bang guy

Moderator
Quote:
My definition is any firearm that has semi-automatic capability that can hold a magazine larger than 30 rounds.


So if you have a semi-auto weapon where there are no available magazines that hold more than 30 rounds it's not an assault weapon but as soon as someone in Italy develops a magazine for it that hold more than 30 rounds your weapon instantly becomes an assault weapon.

That doesn't make much sense.
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by AggieAlum http:///t/397599/great-time-to-be-in-public-schools-in-san-antonio/60#post_3544583
My definition is any firearm that has semi-automatic capability that can hold a magazine larger than 30 rounds. In most cases, these same firearms can be converted to full auto capability whether it's legal to do so or not.

Here's your picture:



You're right it does. Didn't know it until after I bought it. If my wife knew it was capable of holding that size magazine, I assure you she wouldn't have selected it. When I go postal, 'll be sure to remember you reminded me of that fact. Thanks.

Took the picture with my cell phone, downloaded it as a large picture on this site. I'm not wasting my time blowing it up for your convenience.

Both of those magazines were inside the closed Taurus manufactured box. The gun and mags were inside the hard plastic case that came with the gun. So how an aftermarket magazine magically got inside their package is news to me.

And before you ask what's on the end of the grip:

http://defensiveoperatorsgrip.com/users/awp.php?ln=714738
There isn't a semiauto pistol on the market that can't have an extended magazine, just the nature of the best. Not sure why your wife would care that it can hold a big mag, unless she buys one it isn't an issue.
 
aggiealum

aggiealum

Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///t/397599/great-time-to-be-in-public-schools-in-san-antonio/60#post_3544586

Wait, so we have a product that has never been misused but in your paranoid little mind we should ban them? More people are killed in cars and swimming pools each year than by guns so, Perhaps we should ban small rolling coffin cars and require all swimming pools to have a certified lifeguard. After all it is about saving lives right???
Brother. Do you sit around reading the NRA "10 things that kill more people than guns" handbook all day? ONE MORE TIME. Guns were designed to KILL. THAT'S THEIR MAIN PURPOSE. You're honestly going to sit there with a straight face and say that an AR, SKS, AK-47, or Bushmaster has "never been misused"?
What alternate universe do you live in?

More people are killed in cars because they are used 1000X more on a daily basis than someone shooting a gun. You have over 200,000 cars driving around certain highways in LA in ONE DAY. I think even you can figure out the odds of why there are more people killed in cars than guns. And Swimming pools? Seriously? Most of those deaths occurred by accident. So now I suppose you'll say most of those gun deaths in the last year were "accidents". "Oh I'm sorry, I didn't mean to shoot you in the head..." Here are some interesting stats:

One person is killed by a firearm every 17 minutes, 87 people are killed during an average day, and 609 are killed every week. (source: CDC).

I mean, what great numbers those are! Just 609 people die a senseless death each week! WOW. LET'S HAVE MORE GUNS OUT THERE!

You live in your own jaded world...
 
aggiealum

aggiealum

Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bang Guy http:///t/397599/great-time-to-be-in-public-schools-in-san-antonio/60#post_3544587


So if you have a semi-auto weapon where there are no available magazines that hold more than 30 rounds it's not an assault weapon but as soon as someone in Italy develops a magazine for it that hold more than 30 rounds your weapon instantly becomes an assault weapon.

That doesn't make much sense.
Most of the firearms that the government classifies as "assault weapons" already have the capability to hold magazines larger than 30 rounds. The logic behind that number is any firearm that can shoot more than 30 rounds before having to reload it, has the capability to injure or kill (ergo assault) more victims than a firearm that holds 15 rounds or less. Of course you'll have the gun advocates tell you that they can reload a semi-auto pistol with another mag and shoot just as fast as someone standing there shooting a 30 round magazine, but it's physically not possible. Even if it's a 10 second delay, that could be enough for one individual to escape to safety. It's an effort in futility to try and convince a gun zealot the logic behind why certain firearms are more deadly than others. As long as they can buy any gun under the sun, whether there's a logical reason to own one, they could care less how it affects every person in this country's daily lives.

Yet again, we almost had some 17 year old kid go on a senseless shooting spree, that would've destroyed who knows how many family lives. But because of our great 2nd Amendment rights, there's absolutely nothing we can do as a nation to keep this from happening tomorrow, next week, or 6 months from now if yet another mentally disturbed person decides they want to end their life, and they figure they might as well go out 'guns blazing' to make a name for themselves. You people simply call it "collateral damage".
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by AggieAlum http:///t/397599/great-time-to-be-in-public-schools-in-san-antonio/60#post_3544589
Brother. Do you sit around reading the NRA "10 things that kill more people than guns" handbook all day? ONE MORE TIME. Guns were designed to KILL. THAT'S THEIR MAIN PURPOSE. You're honestly going to sit there with a straight face and say that an AR, SKS, AK-47, or Bushmaster has "never been misused"?
What alternate universe do you live in?

More people are killed in cars because they are used 1000X more on a daily basis than someone shooting a gun. You have over 200,000 cars driving around certain highways in LA in ONE DAY. I think even you can figure out the odds of why there are more people killed in cars than guns. And Swimming pools? Seriously? Most of those deaths occurred by accident. So now I suppose you'll say most of those gun deaths in the last year were "accidents". "Oh I'm sorry, I didn't mean to shoot you in the head..." Here are some interesting stats:

One person is killed by a firearm every 17 minutes, 87 people are killed during an average day, and 609 are killed every week. (source: CDC).

I mean, what great numbers those are! Just 609 people die a senseless death each week! WOW. LET'S HAVE MORE GUNS OUT THERE!

You live in your own jaded world...


So it's ok for someone to be killed with anything but a gun. You need help LOL!
 
2quills

2quills

Well-Known Member

Most of the firearms that the government classifies as "assault weapons" already have the capability to hold magazines larger than 30 rounds.  The logic behind that number is any firearm that can shoot more than 30 rounds before having to reload it, has the capability to injure or kill (ergo assault) more victims than a firearm that holds 15 rounds or less.  Of course you'll have the gun advocates tell you that they can reload a semi-auto pistol with another mag and shoot just as fast as someone standing there shooting a 30 round magazine, but it's physically not possible.  Even if it's a 10 second delay, that could be enough for one individual to escape to safety.  It's an effort in futility to try and convince a gun zealot the logic behind why certain firearms are more deadly than others.  As long as they can buy any gun under the sun, whether there's a logical reason to own one, they could care less how it affects every person in this country's daily lives. 
Yet again, we almost had some 17 year old kid go on a senseless shooting spree, that would've destroyed who knows how many family lives.  But because of our great 2nd Amendment rights, there's absolutely nothing we can do as a nation to keep this from happening tomorrow, next week, or 6 months from now if yet another mentally disturbed person decides they want to end their life, and they figure they might as well go out 'guns blazing' to make a name for themselves.  You people simply call it "collateral damage".
Larger capacity mags or drums can be made for just about any gun. What is it about these so called "military grade" weapons that they are somehow special in anyway that only they are designed for larger mags? You simply make a larger mag for any gun. There are 100 round drums designed for glock 9mm for instance. Should we ban your wife's gun the moment someone with designs a 50 round mag for it?
 
bang guy

bang guy

Moderator
Quote:
Originally Posted by AggieAlum http:///t/397599/great-time-to-be-in-public-schools-in-san-antonio/60#post_3544590
Most of the firearms that the government classifies as "assault weapons" already have the capability to hold magazines larger than 30 rounds. The logic behind that number is any firearm that can shoot more than 30 rounds before having to reload it, has the capability to injure or kill (ergo assault) more victims than a firearm that holds 15 rounds or less. Of course you'll have the gun advocates tell you that they can reload a semi-auto pistol with another mag and shoot just as fast as someone standing there shooting a 30 round magazine, but it's physically not possible. Even if it's a 10 second delay, that could be enough for one individual to escape to safety. It's an effort in futility to try and convince a gun zealot the logic behind why certain firearms are more deadly than others. As long as they can buy any gun under the sun, whether there's a logical reason to own one, they could care less how it affects every person in this country's daily lives.

Yet again, we almost had some 17 year old kid go on a senseless shooting spree, that would've destroyed who knows how many family lives. But because of our great 2nd Amendment rights, there's absolutely nothing we can do as a nation to keep this from happening tomorrow, next week, or 6 months from now if yet another mentally disturbed person decides they want to end their life, and they figure they might as well go out 'guns blazing' to make a name for themselves. You people simply call it "collateral damage".

Sorry, I was only referring to your definition. If you look at the government's definition it's basically any firearm that looks scary with no factual basis. At least you actually have some logical reasoning behind you definition and that's a heck of a lot better than "it looks scary". Mossberg shotguns are near the top of the list for murder weapons and yet they are not scary looking enough to be assault weapons.

Base the weapon bans on statistically factual information and you'll make a lot more headway than "nobody needs ten shots to kill a deer".

Also keep in mind that the criminals are not affected by the gun laws. It seems this fact never hits home with the lawmakers. I'm not an NRA puppet, I have not been a member since the 70's when they decided that it's our right to have Teflon bullets. I'm fine with required training, actually a good idea. I'm against registration simply because of the Cuomo type politicians that have no respect for our Constitution.
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member

Sorry, I was only referring to your definition.  If you look at the government's definition it's basically any firearm that looks scary with no factual basis.  Mossberg shotguns are near the top of the list for murder weapons and yet they are not scary looking enough to be assault weapons.
Base the weapon bans on statistically factual information and you'll make a lot more headway than "nobody needs ten shots to kill a deer". 
Also keep in mind that the criminals are not affected by the gun laws.  It seems this fact never hits home with the lawmakers.  I'm not an NRA puppet, I have not been a member since the 70's when they decided that it's our right to have Teflon bullets.  I'm fine with required training, actually a good idea.  I'm against registration simply because of the Cuomo type politicians that have no respect for our Constitution. 
I concur. I have never been an NRA member. Some of their cases they chose to take up i disagree with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top