The time of the Gathering draws near!

Captain Steroid: The time of the Gathering draws near!

What happened last week?

Tainted1: We obviously need more gun control laws to prevent this

That took way too long.

libranoelrose: Captain Steroid: The time of the Gathering draws near!

What happened last week?

A guy here in Phoenix broke up a fight with his sword...

cfffffgagffacfacfacfacfacccccfcaaffff: zulius: libranoelrose: Captain Steroid: The time of the Gathering draws near!

What happened last week?

A guy here in Phoenix broke up a fight with his sword...

So the instigator was....foiled?

cfffffgagffacfacfacfacfacccccfcaaffff: So the instigator was....foiled?



/dammit

phrawgh: [img156.imageshack.us image 850x354]

whar lens flar

Was is rapier-rapier, or just regular rapier?

/because I really like rapiers.

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: RatMaster999: These things need to be covered under an assault weapons ban.

Actually, in many places, a sword is a prohibited weapon. For example, in Texas carrying around that sword would have been a criminal offense. Why groups like the NRA that will defend to the death your right to carry around a gun but can't be bothered to do anything about the really arcane laws around other weapons, I'll never understand.

Maybe because the NRA is a *GUN* group, not a knife/sword/club/cosh/truncheon/nunchuck/crossbow/blowgun/whatever group.

It says "National Rifle Association", not "National Weapon Association", though I'd welcome that kind of NWA.

Hot Carl To Go: Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: RatMaster999: These things need to be covered under an assault weapons ban.

Actually, in many places, a sword is a prohibited weapon. For example, in Texas carrying around that sword would have been a criminal offense. Why groups like the NRA that will defend to the death your right to carry around a gun but can't be bothered to do anything about the really arcane laws around other weapons, I'll never understand.

I would like to think that the reason is because the gun is the only thing that gives you a chance at battling against government forces, should that need arise. Good case for the lethality though... gun allowed then sword should be. You're still a highlander freak but hey.

The real reason is that bladed weapons, outside of bayonets, perhaps, are not the NRA's bailiwick. They are a gun group. Naturally, they defend the Second Amendment as it relates to guns.

way south: Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: RatMaster999: These things need to be covered under an assault weapons ban.

Actually, in many places, a sword is a prohibited weapon. For example, in Texas carrying around that sword would have been a criminal offense. Why groups like the NRA that will defend to the death your right to carry around a gun but can't be bothered to do anything about the really arcane laws around other weapons, I'll never understand.

I would say its because gun owners were chased out of the Democratic party and the NRA had to find a home with the Republicans (who's leadership is less than gun friendly). In order to avoid stepping on its hosts toes, they temper their message to be more about hunters and sportsmen than defending war weapons, which is the intent of the 2nd amendment.

/Proof would be in how little attention the NRA or republicans have given to repealing the Hughes amendment or any of the knife laws that are obviously obsolete.
/A candidate who even spoke of an AWB should have been a non starter... but then politics happened.
/Forget swords. There are places that ban 2" knives because the handle is all evil like.

The NRA doesn't care about knives because it is a *GUN* organization.

When you remember that, the NRA's actions become perfectly logical from the viewpoint of a single issue organization.

MyNameIsMofuga: Prosecutors hinted at mental illness.

Yes, well, making a circle with your finger next to the side of your head is the generally accepted sign.

way south: dittybopper: way south: Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: RatMaster999: These things need to be covered under an assault weapons ban.

Actually, in many places, a sword is a prohibited weapon. For example, in Texas carrying around that sword would have been a criminal offense. Why groups like the NRA that will defend to the death your right to carry around a gun but can't be bothered to do anything about the really arcane laws around other weapons, I'll never understand.

I would say its because gun owners were chased out of the Democratic party and the NRA had to find a home with the Republicans (who's leadership is less than gun friendly). In order to avoid stepping on its hosts toes, they temper their message to be more about hunters and sportsmen than defending war weapons, which is the intent of the 2nd amendment.

/Proof would be in how little attention the NRA or republicans have given to repealing the Hughes amendment or any of the knife laws that are obviously obsolete.
/A candidate who even spoke of an AWB should have been a non starter... but then politics happened.
/Forget swords. There are places that ban 2" knives because the handle is all evil like.

The NRA doesn't care about knives because it is a *GUN* organization.

When you remember that, the NRA's actions become perfectly logical from the viewpoint of a single issue organization.

The Hughes amendment?
The 68 GCA?
The NFA (especially the parts about suppressors and SBR's)?

As a single issue organization they've been slacking on their one issue.

/Meanwhile they spend a pretty penny defending hunting rights.
/Which, while related to firearms ownership, should have taken a back seat to ownership.
/Makes me wish the GOA or JPFO had an NRA sized budget.

NFA stuff is a *TINY* part of gun rights in general, and don't forget that up until 4 years ago, the general consensus among the legal community was that the Second Amendment *DIDN'T* apply to individuals.

I know it's frustrating, but it took 70 years for all those laws to accumulate, and it ain't gonna take just 7 years to roll them all back.

Part of it consists of what is called "battlespace preparation". You don't just go charging in head first, 'cause you'll lose, and lose badly. You have to gradually work up to it. Just like the pro-gun control forces didn't get everything they wanted all at once, neither can we expect to get that.

Also, the reality of the situation is that we have to accept that the NRA also has to cater to the Fudds, and can't afford to alienate them. That is a problem that will eventually solve itself, in that the "Gun Rights 1.0" people will eventually die off and the "Gun Rights 2.0" people, who are much more amenable to things like concealed carry, getting silencers off the NFA list, repealing the Hughes Amendment, etc., will eventually be the majority of the NRA. But it's a generational change that again, will take time.

That's not to say the NRA isn't without fault. It's just that you have to be realistic and take the long term view.

/Not an NRA member
//Was for a couple years back in the late 1990's.
///Organizations aren't my thing: I'm not in the ARRL despite being an avid ham radio operator either.

Why would you stab with a samurai sword? Aren't they more suitable for chopping motions?