If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slate)   Hey, look: a $369 modification that lets your AR-15 fire 900 rounds a minute. You know, for hunting   (slate.com) divider line 582
    More: Interesting, assault weapons ban, semi-automatic rifle, National Firearms Act, trigger fingers  
•       •       •

16482 clicks; posted to Main » on 08 Jan 2013 at 11:17 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



582 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-09 01:17:28 PM  

Nabb1: Uh, the Militia Act gave the President the authority to call militias into service in certain circumstances.  That was not the same as saying Congress was regulating them.


Want to know how I know you're so lazy you can't figure out what to do when things are handed to you on a platter and have the reading comprehension of a flea?
 
2013-01-09 01:19:27 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: Nabb1: That's not what Congress did, and no, Congress does not "organize the militia."

Just to rub it in.
Have some salt and lemon juice.
Then check out Article I Section 8, Clauses 14-16.


I don't think we are discussing the same thing.  The Militia Act was a grant of authority to the President.  When was the last time Congress organized the Militia?  Do we currently have a Militia organized by Congress?  Where does one sign up?  We have a standing army and navy, reserves, the National Guard.  Where is this Militia?
 
2013-01-09 01:21:17 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: Nabb1: Uh, the Militia Act gave the President the authority to call militias into service in certain circumstances.  That was not the same as saying Congress was regulating them.

Want to know how I know you're so lazy you can't figure out what to do when things are handed to you on a platter and have the reading comprehension of a flea?


Jeez.  And you accuse gun owners of overcompensating for a tiny penis.
 
2013-01-09 01:39:44 PM  

Nabb1: demaL-demaL-yeH: Nabb1: That's not what Congress did, and no, Congress does not "organize the militia."

Just to rub it in.
Have some salt and lemon juice.
Then check out Article I Section 8, Clauses 14-16.

I don't think we are discussing the same thing.  The Militia Act was a grant of authority to the President.


Does your mom resent spoon-feeding you?

From the link:

The Militia Act of 1792, Passed May 8, 1792, providing federal standards for the organization of the Militia.

An ACT more effectually to provide for the National Defence, by establishing an Uniform Militia throughout the United States.

I. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia, by the Captain or Commanding Officer of the company, within whose bounds such citizen shall reside, and that within twelve months after the passing of this Act. And it shall at all time hereafter be the duty of every such Captain or Commanding Officer of a company, to enroll every such citizen as aforesaid, and also those who shall, from time to time, arrive at the age of 18 years, or being at the age of 18 years, and under the age of 45 years (except as before excepted) shall come to reside within his bounds; and shall without delay notify such citizen of the said enrollment, by the proper non-commissioned Officer of the company, by whom such notice may be proved. That every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack. That the commissioned Officers shall severally be armed with a sword or hanger, and espontoon; and that from and after five years from the passing of this Act, all muskets from arming the militia as is herein required, shall be of bores sufficient for balls of the eighteenth part of a pound; and every citizen so enrolled, and providing himself with the arms, ammunition and accoutrements, required as aforesaid, shall hold the same exempted from all suits, distresses, executions or sales, for debt or for the payment of taxes.

II. And be it further enacted, That the Vice-President of the United States, the Officers, judicial and executives, of the government of the United States; the members of both houses of Congress, and their respective officers; all custom house officers, with the clerks; all post officers, and stage-drivers who are employed in the care and conveyance of the mail of the post office of the United States; all Ferrymen employed at any ferry on the post road; all inspectors of exports; all pilots, all mariners actually employed in the sea service of any citizen or merchant within the United States; and all persons who now are or may be hereafter exempted by the laws of the respective states, shall be and are hereby exempted from militia duty, notwithstanding their being above the age of eighteen and under the age of forty-five years.

III. And be it further enacted, That within one year after the passing of the Act, the militia of the respective states shall be arranged into divisions, brigades, regiments, battalions, and companies, as the legislature of each state shall direct; and each division, brigade, and regiment, shall be numbered at the formation thereof; and a record made of such numbers of the Adjutant-General's office in the state; and when in the field, or in serviced in the state, such division, brigade, and regiment shall, respectively, take rank according to their numbers, reckoning the first and lowest number highest in rank. That if the same be convenient, each brigade shall consist of four regiments; each regiment or two battalions; each battalion of five companies; each company of sixty-four privates. That the said militia shall be officered by the respective states, as follows: To each division on Major-General, with two Aids-de-camp, with the rank of major; to each brigade, one brigadier-major, with the rank of a major; to each company, one captain, one lieutenant, one ensign, four serjeants, four corporals, one drummer, and one fifer and bugler. That there shall be a regimental staff, to consist of one adjutant, and one quartermaster, to rank as lieutenants; one paymaster; one surgeon, and one surgeon's mate; one serjeant-major; one drum- major, and one fife-major.

IV. And be it further enacted, That out of the militia enrolled as is herein directed, there shall be formed for each battalion, as least one company of grenadiers, light infantry or riflemen; and that each division there shall be, at least, one company of artillery, and one troop of horse: There shall be to each company of artillery, one captain, two lieutenants, four serjeants, four corporals, six gunners, six bombardiers, one drummer, and one fifer. The officers to be armed with a sword or hanger, a fusee, bayonet and belt, with a cartridge box to contain twelve cartridges; and each private of matoss shall furnish themselves with good horses of at least fourteen hands and an half high, and to be armed with a sword and pair of pistols, the holsters of which to be covered with bearskin caps. Each dragoon to furnish himself with a serviceable horse, at least fourteen hands and an half high, a good saddle, bridle, mail-pillion and valise, holster, and a best plate and crupper, a pair of boots and spurs; a pair of pistols, a sabre, and a cartouchbox to contain twelve cartridges for pistols. That each company of artillery and troop of house shall be formed of volunteers from the brigade, at the discretion of the Commander in Chief of the State, not exceeding one company of each to a regiment, nor more in number than one eleventh part of the infantry, and shall be uniformly clothed in raiments, to be furnished at their expense, the colour and fashion to be determined by the Brigadier commanding the brigade to which they belong.

V. And be it further enacted, That each battalion and regiment shall be provided with the state and regimental colours by the Field-Officers, and each company with a drum and fife or bugle-horn, by the commissioned officers of the company, in such manner as the legislature of the respective States shall direct.

VI. And be it further enacted, That there shall be an adjutant general appointed in each state, whose duty it shall be to distribute all orders for the Commander in Chief of the State to the several corps; to attend all publick reviews, when the Commander in Chief of the State shall review the militia, or any part thereof; to obey all orders from him relative to carrying into execution, and perfecting, the system of military discipline established by this Act; to furnish blank forms of different returns that may be required; and to explain the principles of which they should be made; to receive from the several officers of the different corps throughout the state, returns of the militia under their command, reporting the actual situation of their arms, accoutrements, and ammunition, their delinquencies, and every other thing which relates to the general advancement of good order and discipline: All which, the several officers of the division, brigades, regiments, and battalions are hereby required to make in the usual manner, so that the said adjutant general may be duly furnished therewith: From all which returns be shall make proper abstracts, and by the same annually before the Commander in Chief of the State.

VII. And be it further enacted, That the rules of discipline, approved and established by Congress, in their resolution of the twenty-ninth of March, 1779, shall be the rules of discipline so be observed by the militia throughout the United States, except such deviations from the said rules, as may be rendered necessary by the requisitions of the Act, or by some other unavoidable circumstances. It shall be the duty of the Commanding Officer as every muster, whether by battalion, regiment, or single company, to cause the militia to be exercised and trained, agreeably to the said rules of said discipline.

VIII. And be it further enacted, That all commissioned officers shall take rank according to the date of their commissions; and when two of the same grade bear an equal date, then their rank to be determined by lots, to be drawn by them before the Commanding officers of the brigade, regiment, battalion, company or detachment.

IX. And be it further enacted That if any person whether officer or solder, belonging to the militia of any state, and called out into the service of the United States, be wounded or disabled, while in actual service, he shall be taken care of an provided for at the publick expense.

X. And be it further enacted, That it shall be the duty of the brigade inspector, to attend the regimental and battalion meeting of the militia composing their several brigades, during the time of their being under arms, to inspect their arms, ammunition and accoutrements; superintend their exercise and maneuvres and introduce the system of military discipline before described, throughout the brigade, agreeable to law, and such orders as they shall from time to time receive from the commander in Chief of the State; to make returns to the adjutant general of the state at least once in every year, of the militia of the brigade to which he belongs, reporting therein the actual situation of the arms, accoutrement, and ammunition, of the several corps, and every other thing which, in his judgment, may relate to their government and general advancement of good order and military disciple; an adjutant general shall make a return of all militia of the state, to the Commander in Chief of the said state, and a duplicate of the same to the president of the United States.

And whereas sundry corps of artillery, cavalry and infantry now exist in several of the said states, which by the laws, customs, or usages thereof, have not been incorporated with, or subject to the general regulation of the militia.

XI. Be it enacted, That such corps retain their accustomed privileges subject, nevertheless, to all other duties required by this Act, in like manner with the other militias.
 
2013-01-09 01:43:42 PM  

The_Sponge: t3knomanser: A gun tax, for example, would be perfectly reasonable-

Not to me....I already have a 9.2% sales tax where I live.


Set the tax to be proportional to the amount of harm caused.

So this thing has been used to kill 0 people...
 
2013-01-09 01:53:27 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: An ACT more effectually to provide for the National Defence, by establishing an Uniform Militia throughout the United States.


Post the Heller decision while you're at it.
 
2013-01-09 02:00:03 PM  

R.A.Danny: demaL-demaL-yeH: An ACT more effectually to provide for the National Defence, by establishing an Uniform Militia throughout the United States.

Post the Heller decision while you're at it.


No, I'll trump that:
Constitution of the United States of America Article I Section 8 Clause 16:
[The Congress shall have Power] To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
 
2013-01-09 02:01:46 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: R.A.Danny: demaL-demaL-yeH: An ACT more effectually to provide for the National Defence, by establishing an Uniform Militia throughout the United States.

Post the Heller decision while you're at it.

No, I'll trump that:
Constitution of the United States of America Article I Section 8 Clause 16:
[The Congress shall have Power] To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;


Which has nothing to do withthe fact that gun ownership is in fact an individual right. Yes there can be limitations, but ownership of most rifles and handguns is explicitly protected.
 
2013-01-09 02:04:40 PM  
I hate these threads. I won't echo the "cars, hammers, baseball bats, etc." argument because its already been beaten to death. What I'd like to know from the ones here that want round up all the guns is how are you going to do it? There are simply not enough police in the U.S. to do a house-to-house search, even with the info from the 4473s. The military? Posse Comitatus, and Obama can't just sign an executive order suspending it. If he did, he might find that the DoD won't obey a clearly illegal order, and Congress won't repeal it for this.
There are enough gun laws already. The problem is they aren't properly enforced as it is. The real problem is mental health monitoring. All of those shooters raised red flags for months or years prior to their acts, yet no one had the stones to do anything because they were more afraid of being sued. The only winners in this game are going to be the lawyers.
 
2013-01-09 02:07:38 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;


Yet nothing about denying individual people the ability to possess certain kinds of arms.
 
2013-01-09 02:20:05 PM  

Mangoose: Why don't I need to fire 900 rounds a minute?


Assume 30 cents per round, 900 rounds per minute = $270/minute!
 
2013-01-09 02:21:34 PM  
Incidentally, 900 rounds of .223 ammo would weight about 25 pounds, so shoulder firing an AR-15 with a 25 lb 900 round (lol!) magazine might not be as accurate as you'd think!
 
2013-01-09 02:38:30 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: One of the guys I work with is in the market for a new handgun. Perhaps he could send you a picture of his cock and you could tell him what would work best for him. Let me know eh?


This was far more amusing to me than it should have been.
 
2013-01-09 02:46:10 PM  
Thankfully Obama is going to take all of the 900 round magazines away, right?

Stupid farking liberals.
 
2013-01-09 03:05:22 PM  

fusillade762: t3knomanser: Similarly, requiring firearm owners to carry insurance would create a social net system.

I'm fond of this idea. You have to have insurance to drive a car, why not for owning a gun?


You need insurance to drive a car on a public road. Farm vehicles are exempt, as they rarely leave private property. If I'm not taking my gun to the mall or WalMart, why should I be paying taxes for it?
 
2013-01-09 03:07:44 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: Loaded Six String: Incitement to riot, the commonly brought up "no yelling fire in a crowded theater" is not a restriction on the First Amendment in the same way that restricting certain types of firearms is a restriction of the Second Amendment. It is a situation in which a person is not protected by their First Amendment right to freedom of speech from civil/legal liability. A restriction on what types of firearms are protected to "keep and bear" is a form of prior restraint. The equivalent for the First Amendment would be theater patrons having their mouths duct taped so they cannot yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater.

To review: yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater is not a First Amendment protected action. Misusing a firearm (assault, murder, etc.) is not a Second Amendment protected action. This particular analogy is flawed and you should no longer use it.

Are you buying your own bullshiat?

/Because I'm not.
//Neither are the Supremes.


Now now, explanations not insults. If I made a logical error, simply telling me it's bullshiat isn't getting your point across.
 
2013-01-09 04:22:53 PM  

redlegrick: I hate these threads. I won't echo the "cars, hammers, baseball bats, etc." argument because its already been beaten to death. What I'd like to know from the ones here that want round up all the guns is how are you going to do it? There are simply not enough police in the U.S. to do a house-to-house search, even with the info from the 4473s. The military? Posse Comitatus, and Obama can't just sign an executive order suspending it. If he did, he might find that the DoD won't obey a clearly illegal order, and Congress won't repeal it for this.
There are enough gun laws already. The problem is they aren't properly enforced as it is. The real problem is mental health monitoring. All of those shooters raised red flags for months or years prior to their acts, yet no one had the stones to do anything because they were more afraid of being sued. The only winners in this game are going to be the lawyers.


who's talking about "rounding up all the guns?"
 
2013-01-09 04:43:35 PM  

Loaded Six String: demaL-demaL-yeH: Loaded Six String: Incitement to riot, the commonly brought up "no yelling fire in a crowded theater" is not a restriction on the First Amendment in the same way that restricting certain types of firearms is a restriction of the Second Amendment. It is a situation in which a person is not protected by their First Amendment right to freedom of speech from civil/legal liability. A restriction on what types of firearms are protected to "keep and bear" is a form of prior restraint. The equivalent for the First Amendment would be theater patrons having their mouths duct taped so they cannot yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater.

To review: yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater is not a First Amendment protected action. Misusing a firearm (assault, murder, etc.) is not a Second Amendment protected action. This particular analogy is flawed and you should no longer use it.

Are you buying your own bullshiat?

/Because I'm not.
//Neither are the Supremes.

Now now, explanations not insults. If I made a logical error, simply telling me it's bullshiat isn't getting your point across.


As to restrictions on personal firearms being unconstitutional?

"That every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack. That the commissioned Officers shall severally be armed with a sword or hanger, and espontoon; and that from and after five years from the passing of this Act, all muskets from arming the militia as is herein required, shall be of bores sufficient for balls of the eighteenth part of a pound; and every citizen so enrolled, and providing himself with the arms, ammunition and accoutrements, required as aforesaid, shall hold the same exempted from all suits, distresses, executions or sales, for debt or for the payment of taxes."
"That out of the militia enrolled as is herein directed, there shall be formed for each battalion, as least one company of grenadiers, light infantry or riflemen; and that each division there shall be, at least, one company of artillery, and one troop of horse: There shall be to each company of artillery, one captain, two lieutenants, four serjeants, four corporals, six gunners, six bombardiers, one drummer, and one fifer. The officers to be armed with a sword or hanger, a fusee, bayonet and belt, with a cartridge box to contain twelve cartridges; and each private of matoss shall furnish themselves with good horses of at least fourteen hands and an half high, and to be armed with a sword and pair of pistols, the holsters of which to be covered with bearskin caps. Each dragoon to furnish himself with a serviceable horse, at least fourteen hands and an half high, a good saddle, bridle, mail-pillion and valise, holster, and a best plate and crupper, a pair of boots and spurs; a pair of pistols, a sabre, and a cartouchbox to contain twelve cartridges for pistols. That each company of artillery and troop of house shall be formed of volunteers from the brigade, at the discretion of the Commander in Chief of the State, not exceeding one company of each to a regiment, nor more in number than one eleventh part of the infantry, and shall be uniformly clothed in raiments, to be furnished at their expense, the colour and fashion to be determined by the Brigadier commanding the brigade to which they belong."

Yup. It's unconstitutional prior restraint to standardize the personal arms and accoutrement of the Militia.
Mandates are unconstitutional, too. (There goes Obamacare.)
There is no way that the right to keep and bear arms went hand-in-hand with a responsibility.
There was no universal citizen responsibility to be an active, trained, organized, disciplined member of the Milita.

(How does Amendment II go, again? "A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State...")
Too many people are ignoring that first responsibility.
Madison appointee Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story wrote in 1833 that he feared this contempt for being a member of a well regulated militia would come to pass.

Laws restricting the exercise of enumerated rights are both legal and constitutional.
Don't believe me? Go print some money.
 
2013-01-09 05:08:44 PM  
I still see nothing in there that allows the government to deprive individuals of one or more types of firearms.
 
2013-01-09 05:21:42 PM  

Nabb1: I have only two guns.  A handgun I bought a few years ago, and a rifle I inherited from my great uncle, who was in the 101st Airborne and stormed the beaches of Normandy and saw action in the Battle of the Bulge.  I guess it's a shame some of these FARKers in this thread weren't available so they could have just waved their massive dicks at the Germans and scared them away instead.


your grasp of history is a little shaky.
If your Great Uncle was in the 101st Airborne, he didn't storm the beaches of jack and or shiat. the 101st being an AIRBORNE Division was airdropped behind the Atlantic Wall during early stages of the Normandy Invasion in hopes of disrupting German reinforcements, destroying artillery positions supporting the beach defenses and where possible attacking same from the rear. But storming the Beaches? No...the 101st did NONE of that.
 
2013-01-09 06:05:53 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: Loaded Six String: demaL-demaL-yeH: Loaded Six String: Incitement to riot, the commonly brought up "no yelling fire in a crowded theater" is not a restriction on the First Amendment in the same way that restricting certain types of firearms is a restriction of the Second Amendment. It is a situation in which a person is not protected by their First Amendment right to freedom of speech from civil/legal liability. A restriction on what types of firearms are protected to "keep and bear" is a form of prior restraint. The equivalent for the First Amendment would be theater patrons having their mouths duct taped so they cannot yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater.

To review: yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater is not a First Amendment protected action. Misusing a firearm (assault, murder, etc.) is not a Second Amendment protected action. This particular analogy is flawed and you should no longer use it.

Are you buying your own bullshiat?

/Because I'm not.
//Neither are the Supremes.

Now now, explanations not insults. If I made a logical error, simply telling me it's bullshiat isn't getting your point across.

As to restrictions on personal firearms being unconstitutional?

All that text because you made this one misrepresentation. I did not say this. I said "This particular analogy is flawed and you should no longer use it." in regards to yelling fire in a crowded theater being an acceptable example of restrictions on firearms because there is no prior restraint to yelling fire in a crowded theater, yet there is prior restraint in restricting the type, number, etc. firearms which a person can own.

If you want to make the case for restrictions of the Second Amendment you should stop using yelling fire in a crowded theater for this purpose, as it is a flawed equivalence. Of course, being a gun owner, I don't know why I'm bothering to correct you on this. Maybe it's more for other people who may be exposed to that argument.

 
2013-01-09 06:19:24 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: (How does Amendment II go, again? "A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State...")
Too many people are ignoring that first responsibility.


FFS give it a rest, we have a legal system that says the supreme court's interpretation of the constitition is law. They have said the second is correctly interpretted as the individual having a right to bear arms and the milita part is just filler. That is the reality of the law in the USA today. You going on and on about all the militia stuff has no bearing on anything at all.
 
2013-01-09 06:55:52 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: As to restrictions on personal firearms being unconstitutional?

"That every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty four
...


Can you explain which part allows the government to forbid people from possessing certain types of firearms? I see a lot about the equipment and training requirements of militia members, but nothing that forbids them from possessing weapons at home or outside of their militia duties.
 
2013-01-09 07:25:04 PM  

redlegrick: I hate these threads. I won't echo the "cars, hammers, baseball bats, etc." argument because its already been beaten to death. What I'd like to know from the ones here that want round up all the guns is how are you going to do it?


You can also make the process of purchasing a handgun prohibitively elaborate that it discourages prospective gun owners from buying them. Take my home state, California, for example. If you want to buy a handgun, it's really simple:

1. Pass the Handgun Safety Certification exam. It's 30 questions, divided into true/false and multiple-choice questions. Congrats! Now you are eligible to buy a handgun.
2. If you want to buy a new gun from a federally licensed dealer, you must provide a driver's license plus an additional form of ID that shows you live in the address on your license (deed to property, utility bill, car registration, etc.)
3. Your info is run through the National Instant Criminal Background Check system and you must wait 10 days for this information to check out before you can take possession of your handgun.

That is simple right? Well, it gets a little trickier when you add the following, which California has done:

1. You can only buy one handgun from a dealer's inventory every 30 days.
2. If you want to buy a new handgun online, you must first check to see if the handgun you want is in the state DOJ's roster of handguns approved for sale. These handguns are submitted by the manufacturer to the state for safety testing. The manufacturer pays a fee so that these guns will be certified if they pass the test. This fee must be paid each time for the state certification to be renewed. So you might have a model in stainless OK for sale in California, but not the blued model. (Screwy, I know.)
3. Private party transfers (buying a used handgun) must be done at an FFL. These are exempt from the 1-in-30 rule listed above as well as the roster requirement listed in item No. 2. The 10-day waiting period still applies.
4. You can buy an "off-roster" handgun, but you must have it modified to be a single-shot weapon during the 10-day period. After you take physical possession of the handgun, then it can be restored to its factory configuration.
5. If you buy a handgun and it comes with standard-capacity magazines, these must be shipped or sold disassembled and then modified to meet the 10-round capacity limit.

Some people have trouble keeping track of all of these, so they just say "fark it." Some online sellers have the same dilemma and they too have taken the "fark it" attitude and just flat-out do not ship anything to California. And several manufacturers have decided not to make "California-friendly" versions of their handguns at all. So there's no de facto gun ban, but with all that red tape in place, it's just as effective as one.
 
2013-01-09 08:48:52 PM  

simkatu: To pretend that every tom dick and harry needs an AR-15 with a 100 round magazine is just stupid. If your government wanted to destroy you, they will do it from 50,000 feet in the sky with unmanned drones. Your stupid little AR-15 will do nothing to stop it you fat slob.


Kinda this.

I think the "if you don't need it for hunting, then you shouldn't be allowed to have it" misses the point of the 2nd amendment, personally. It's the right to "bear arms" after all, which is "the right to arm oneself" and it doesn't say what kind of arms you can have. IF it's supposedly about the right to revolution, all the more so.

That SAID, I'm with you too, if it ever really does come down to the revolution and citizens fighting the army, well... it isn't going to be about individual tough guys prepping over MREs in the basement with a gun - ZZZT from a drone in the air, you're done. Anything meaningful will take way more coordinated action, and not even all about weapon fighting anyway, you'd need strikes and wrecking the economy and that sorta thing. I mean heck, look at places in the world where uprisings DO happen, they don't all succeed by a long shot and usually their armies are shiatty compared to the US army.

And anyway, all the talk about these semiautomatic weapons completely aside, ARE people really permitted to own a tank in the US? Privately? With ammo in it? There's the guy in San Diego who went on a tank rampage (rolling over stuff, not shooting) but it was stolen so not quite the same...
 
2013-01-09 09:50:42 PM  

Loaded Six String: Of course, being a gun owner, I don't know why I'm bothering to correct you on this. Maybe it's more for other people who may be exposed to that argument.


He's just another yappy dog that doesn't even care about the subject.
 
2013-01-10 01:35:13 AM  

imthefonze: Coelacanth: Guns have pretty much replaced Jesus and Mister Rogers here in America. I just want the right to gun down once of yours if one of mine gets fragged because somebody had a bad day.

I dont even understand what you just wrote. Try again?


Sorry, I'm just so genuinely pissed off by the pseudo-religious gun lobby and their "guns are sacred" attitude that I like to see a few of their kids bite the bullet.
 
2013-01-10 02:02:43 AM  

Coelacanth: imthefonze: Coelacanth: Guns have pretty much replaced Jesus and Mister Rogers here in America. I just want the right to gun down once of yours if one of mine gets fragged because somebody had a bad day.

I dont even understand what you just wrote. Try again?

Sorry, I'm just so genuinely pissed off by the pseudo-religious gun lobby and their "guns are sacred" attitude that I like to see a few of their kids bite the bullet.


That's very mature and rational of you, and not at all unbalanced or psychopathic. no siree, not at all
 
2013-01-10 02:24:36 AM  

pedrop357: Coelacanth: imthefonze: Coelacanth: Guns have pretty much replaced Jesus and Mister Rogers here in America. I just want the right to gun down once of yours if one of mine gets fragged because somebody had a bad day.

I dont even understand what you just wrote. Try again?

Sorry, I'm just so genuinely pissed off by the pseudo-religious gun lobby and their "guns are sacred" attitude that I like to see a few of their kids bite the bullet.

That's very mature and rational of you, and not at all unbalanced or psychopathic. no siree, not at all


I much prefer unarmed psychopaths to armed psychopaths like you.
 
2013-01-10 06:14:12 AM  

lilbordr: I miss Hunter. I wish he was still around. I'd be interested to get his opinion of the whole scene...
[media.nowpublic.net image 500x333]


He would probably highlight how half of all 'gun deaths' are suicides and another quarter are entirely gangland violence done by 16-19 year old 'kids' caused by the drug war and the vast majority of the remainder are personal squabbles which could have just as easily involved a hammer or kitchen knife.

Then he would have shot himself in the head.
 
2013-01-10 08:33:28 PM  

violentsalvation: Who admits he doesn't own a gun because the laws in New York were a hindrance to his rights


He must live in the city where they have different laws. In the state I can get any weapon I want.
 
2013-01-10 08:35:16 PM  

Diddle_squat: Why stop at 900 rounds per minute? Sounds much deadlier to say 54,000 bullets per hour!


or 1,296,000 a day.
No wonder there's an ammunition shortage
 
Displayed 32 of 582 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report