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.

(MyWay News)   Federal Law Enforcement Officials say the man accused in a shooting rampage at the Washington Navy Yard that left at least 12 people dead has been identified as Aaron Alexis, a 34 year-old man from Texas   (apnews.myway.com) divider line 896
    More: Followup, Washington Navy Yard, Washington, Texas, the man accused, officials, american patriots, long gun, federal  
•       •       •

10004 clicks; posted to Main » on 16 Sep 2013 at 4:19 PM (44 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-09-16 06:22:12 PM

quo vadimus: I used to come to these threads because we had better links to better information faster than 'the news,' and even sometimes some good conversation with all the human qualities of humor, poignancy, thoughtfulness.

Now we have the same inane gun argument over and over again. It's like Westboro Baptist showing up to a birthday party. Yeah, you have a right to your free speech, yelling whatever with absolutely no sincere belief that you will change a single mind. But nobody's listening, because you're ruining a good thing, and you're quite often looking totally classless while doing it.

The conversation certainly needs to happen. BUT NOT HERE.


The thing is, the same thing happens everywhere this conversation happens. People argue based on emotion, and any time statistics are brought up, they are twisted to support whoever is bringing them up. When that fails, each side accuses the other side of bringing up the same debate points they have used before, and then the hyperbole of "well if guns are legal then let's all have nukes" and "well if that law doesn't work let's just get rid of all laws" and things just go downhill from there. Some people hate guns at a very deep emotional level and some love them, neither of those extremes will ever have a reasonable debate with the other because you can't debate with emotion.
 
2013-09-16 06:22:15 PM

spongeboob: xalres: There's no possible way a person can rack up a body count in the dozens using a baseball bat or a knife in the same amount of time it would take them to do it with a gun. Yes. Crazy people will act crazy no matter what but acting like easy access to firearms doesn't help them achieve such a staggering body count with little danger is willfully ignoring the obvious.

How about two dead and nine injured


Two. Wow.

LAST CENTURY.
 
2013-09-16 06:22:26 PM
Take away one type of gun = open yourself up to losing all guns
Take away one freedom = open yourself up to losing all freedom

Do I have that argument right?
 
2013-09-16 06:23:28 PM

Atomic Spunk: [i1260.photobucket.com image 428x594]

RIP Alexis Texas


Now THAT would truly be a national tragedy.
 
2013-09-16 06:23:35 PM

PainfulItching: facepalm - OK, it's paperwork that keeps a couple of hundred people on a stateside base from carrying a personal weapon. Not the fact that if something like today were to happen and a plainclothes FBI agent or police officer were to respond to it, with their weapon drawn they would become targets from every window and doorway.

And there would be no way to coordinate response in any type of military fashion because there is no communication between commands and lower ranking forces. Just every man for himself.


The jokes on you. My job when I was in the navy was as a Small Arms Petty Officer on two different commands and was personally responsible for training people and issuing small arms to sentries and the QRF along with the related paperwork and keeping track of where each bullet was and what lot it came from. That's exactly why they don't like to issue them nilly-willy. Lose track of just one bullet and it's a JAG investigation. Can you imagine what would happen if it were an entire weapon that was lost or stolen? Paperwork is exactly why they don't issue unless the task requires it. Personal weapons aren't their concern outside of making sure that it is an approved working model and thet the person who has it is qualified in its use, and odds are that they are already qualified as a part of their normal duties which means zero extra paperwork anyway.
 
2013-09-16 06:23:57 PM

atomicmask: All of them, you farking moron,


don't know much about the military do you?
 
2013-09-16 06:24:21 PM

CheapEngineer: Obscene_CNN: Seems like he entered the navy yard with a shot gun then "upgraded" his weapon by taking new ones from the people he killed.

Finally, someone who learned something from Video Games.


And, in many of those 'gun control meccas' around the world, shotguns are legal.

Thus, using them as an example of how the USA should be is moot in this case, unless those countries no longer have guards armed with military weaponry.
 
2013-09-16 06:24:42 PM

Snarfangel: So far, the shooter is known as Aaron Alexis. At what point does he become a three-name shooter?


Within 24hrs is my bet.
 
2013-09-16 06:25:08 PM

hundreddollarman: Grand_Moff_Joseph: hundreddollarman: Atomic Spunk: [i1260.photobucket.com image 428x594]

RIP Alexis Texas

I got to meet her earlier this year. Got to grab DAT ASS.

/CSB.

O_O????  This won't get me anywhere, but the power of the FWC and/or maple vodak compels you to explain yourself!!  :D

She was the headline performer at a strip club in the SF Bay Area back in February. I rounded up some buds and we went. After her feature performance, we got to meet her in the VIP room. She was offering signed merch and you could take a Polaroid with her for $20. Got my photo snapped with my hand on DAT ASS. Best $20 spent ever.


You know that now we will require pics.

Meanwhile, I do not know why everybody is discussing about gun control and stuff when we already mentioned Alexis Texas.
 
2013-09-16 06:25:25 PM
So farking glad I got stuck in traffic omw to work today. All coworkers survived thankfully.
 
2013-09-16 06:25:50 PM

vrax: leevis: vrax: AngryDragon: vrax: AngryDragon: shower_in_my_socks: One man killed 12 people, just as the authors of the 2nd Amt intended. I eagerly await news of which well regulated militia he was member of so we can get to the bottom of this. The rest of the world thinks our gun laws and gun culture are crazy, and they are farking right.

Ironic that they don't let soldiers carry sidearms on a military installation isn't it?  The ultimate expression of a gun-free zone.

It's interesting that even the military sees the need for limits on when and where it's appropriate to carry weapons and yet people are fighting for the right to carry them everywhere out in public.

And this shows how effective this policy is.  It makes no sense that probably THE most trained force on the planet regarding firearms is not allowed to carry them.   It's a political decision not a common sense one.

Is it?  Who is the Navy trying to impress?

I wouldn't go so far as to consider the Navy THE most trained force on the planet regarding firearms. I think most of them only fire them at basic training.

Yeah, but he said their on-base disarmament is a political decision and not a common sense one, so it must be true.  I bet every one of those people on that yard was expertly trained in close-quarters, urban combat scenarios, and would instantly work as a perfect team in such a situation if only the Navy had allowed them to be armed.  Stupid Navy Democrats!


FTFY
 
2013-09-16 06:25:58 PM

xalres: How many tyrannies have y'all overthrown?


One, so far.
 
2013-09-16 06:26:01 PM

vrax: Aaron Alexis


Even if it ends up being Aaron, NMN, Alexis.
 
2013-09-16 06:28:09 PM

vrax: James10952001: vrax: James10952001: skozlaw: someonelse: Places with armed guards are classified as gun-free zones now?

Sssh. These are the same idiots that still bring up Columbine as an example of why we need armed guards in schools.

We don't need armed guards in every school. The mere possibility that anyone *could* be armed is an effective deterrent. Possibly more so than having a few guards that are known to be armed.

Can't take out the armed folks first if you don't know who is packing. Won't solve everything but it's better than having a gun-free victim zone.

Maybe nobody need be armed at all.  Maybe the solution is the old "Beware of Dog!" or "This House Protected By..." signs that weren't backed up by anything, but simply said, "Move along!" to the criminal.  Every school will just have signs that say, "Warning: Heavily Armed School!"  Here in CA we could add onto the end of that "(And Not Just The Students)".

Well, let me know when you have a way of preventing some nut from ignoring the gun free zone signs and coming in anyway.

Well, obviously, to be effective, those signs couldn't coexist.  "Heavily Armed Gun-Free Zone!"  That's just silly!  It sends a mixed message to those who can read.

And remember that everyone who was pushing the last gun control bill swore up and down that nobody was trying to take away guns, just ban certain types and that anyone who thought otherwise was a paranoid nut. Was that true or are they full of shiat?

Well, some guns are not all guns.  So, a little of both.


So which guns? The proposed law banned a number I purely cosmetic features. Will that law reduce gun crime, or is it a stepping stone for the next tragedy to be used to pass still more restrictive laws?
 
2013-09-16 06:28:32 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: spongeboob: xalres: There's no possible way a person can rack up a body count in the dozens using a baseball bat or a knife in the same amount of time it would take them to do it with a gun. Yes. Crazy people will act crazy no matter what but acting like easy access to firearms doesn't help them achieve such a staggering body count with little danger is willfully ignoring the obvious.

How about two dead and nine injured

Two. Wow.

LAST CENTURY.


Next you are probably going to point out that following this tragedy NYC outlawed swords and that no other mass killing like this happened.
 
2013-09-16 06:29:33 PM

Walker: We're learning more about the deceased suspect's Navy record. He actually was given a medal for the Global war on Terror, according to the Department of Defense.YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG!


That probably means he deployed to Kuwait or Bahrain. It's really more of a campaign ribbon, but they actually give you a medal for service down range. If he'd been in Iraq or Afghanistan, he would have gotten one of those specific campaign medals.
 
2013-09-16 06:30:30 PM

PainfulItching: Take away one type of gun = open yourself up to losing all guns
Take away one freedom = open yourself up to losing all freedom

Do I have that argument right?


Yes you do. It's called a slippery slope argument and generally is employed by people who have nothing.
 
2013-09-16 06:32:09 PM

PainfulItching: Take away one type of gun = open yourself up to losing all guns
Take away one freedom = open yourself up to losing all freedom

Do I have that argument right?


It's a lot easier to erode rights one at a time. If I wanted to ban something, I would gradually instate more and more restrictions, wouldn't you? Banning free speech wouldn't fly, but I bet you could get a lot of people to sign a petition to establish free speech zones.
 
2013-09-16 06:33:26 PM

mbillips: Walker: We're learning more about the deceased suspect's Navy record. He actually was given a medal for the Global war on Terror, according to the Department of Defense.YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG!

That probably means he deployed to Kuwait or Bahrain. It's really more of a campaign ribbon, but they actually give you a medal for service down range. If he'd been in Iraq or Afghanistan, he would have gotten one of those specific campaign medals.


Not hardly.  It means jack squat.  It only means you were in during GWOT.  GWOT Expeditionary medal means you went somewhere.
 
2013-09-16 06:33:58 PM

GRCooper: unless those countries no longer have guards armed with military weaponry.


It really is amazing how so many Americans are so ignorant of the world they consider that outrageous.

/Only 7% of police officers in London are even trained in the use of firearms;  they are rarely carried
//Their police tend not to murder college kids asking for help with their car
 
2013-09-16 06:34:12 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: s2s2s2: shower_in_my_socks: One man killed 12 people, just as the authors of the 2nd Amt intended. I eagerly await news of which well regulated militia he was member of so we can get to the bottom of this. The rest of the world thinks our gun laws and gun culture are crazy, and they are farking right.

*Europe

Australia
Canada
Japan


Most Canadians wish that they had more rights, like in the US, rather than think everyone here is crazy.
 
2013-09-16 06:34:45 PM

EbolaNYC: Why is it that in these military installations no one has a weapon? There's no armed security at all?

WTF man.


Back in the day I worked, as US Army, in a really secret place. The civilians did not like the Military Guards so we suddenly had guards that would make TSA look like rocket scientist. First the guards  were armed but after a few mishaps handling weapons they were not armed.  I will never forget the time I was leaving work and a woman that looked about my Mom's age at the time told me that she did not have to check my backpack because in my big brown eyes she could tell I was too nice to be a bad guy. Reported her to my First Sergeant and CO. Never saw her again.

I ETSed in 1998, I thought things changed with 2011 but maybe not.
 
2013-09-16 06:34:48 PM

mbillips: Walker: We're learning more about the deceased suspect's Navy record. He actually was given a medal for the Global war on Terror, according to the Department of Defense.YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG!

That probably means he deployed to Kuwait or Bahrain. It's really more of a campaign ribbon, but they actually give you a medal for service down range. If he'd been in Iraq or Afghanistan, he would have gotten one of those specific campaign medals.


He had enlisted in the Navy in 2007 and rose to the rank of Aviation Electrician's Mate 3rd Class.
From 2008 to 2011, Alexis served with the Fleet Logistics Support Squadron in Fort Worth.
 
2013-09-16 06:35:15 PM
James10952001
So which guns? The proposed law banned a number I purely cosmetic features. Will that law reduce gun crime, or is it a stepping stone for the next tragedy to be used to pass still more restrictive laws?


I get this. If an AR15 were to become illegal to own, then would an SKS with a detachable mag or a mini-14 be used?

It would be a nice start if 30 round clips as a start could be made illegal even if they can be printed. Because last time I checked even that was not allowed to pass.

In 1986 full auto arm not grandfathered in were effectively made illegal for those of moderate incomes, but short of the temporary limitations in 1996 I don't remember a further clapdown on gunowners.
 
2013-09-16 06:35:50 PM

Cletus C.: PainfulItching: Take away one type of gun = open yourself up to losing all guns
Take away one freedom = open yourself up to losing all freedom

Do I have that argument right?

Yes you do. It's called a slippery slope argument and generally is employed by people who have nothing.


And this here is slapping a name on the argument and casually dismissing it as old and busted, as is often done by people who have nothing.

"I don't have a sensible counter debate, therefore your analogy is wrong or has been used before and you are an idiot"
 
2013-09-16 06:35:57 PM

Radioactive Ass: PainfulItching: facepalm - OK, it's paperwork that keeps a couple of hundred people on a stateside base from carrying a personal weapon. Not the fact that if something like today were to happen and a plainclothes FBI agent or police officer were to respond to it, with their weapon drawn they would become targets from every window and doorway.

And there would be no way to coordinate response in any type of military fashion because there is no communication between commands and lower ranking forces. Just every man for himself.

The jokes on you. My job when I was in the navy was as a Small Arms Petty Officer on two different commands and was personally responsible for training people and issuing small arms to sentries and the QRF along with the related paperwork and keeping track of where each bullet was and what lot it came from. That's exactly why they don't like to issue them nilly-willy. Lose track of just one bullet and it's a JAG investigation. Can you imagine what would happen if it were an entire weapon that was lost or stolen? Paperwork is exactly why they don't issue unless the task requires it. Personal weapons aren't their concern outside of making sure that it is an approved working model and thet the person who has it is qualified in its use, and odds are that they are already qualified as a part of their normal duties which means zero extra paperwork anyway.


So their role in a situation like today is probably already determined. That's not what I was talking about.

I was talking about the personnel described here who would have no defined role, and would be able to roam free if they felt like disobeying orders to evacuate an area and try to become a hero. This is who everyone is talking about. The A Team, Chuck Norris, and Rambo. The superhero that the people sitting at a keyboard spitting up about this issue think could have taken this guy out with the .45 stashed in their desk drawer like on TV.
 
2013-09-16 06:37:14 PM
I have a theory how the gunmen got past security with so many guns--Political correctness. These days, to stop any person of color to conduct a legal search is tantamount to racial profiling.
 
2013-09-16 06:37:25 PM

Cletus C.: Yes you do. It's called a slippery slope argument and generally is employed by people who have nothing.


When you have states seriously talking about banning entire classes of weapons, banning lead bullets for hunting which has the side effect of essentially banning hunting because all of the alternatives are considered armor piercing and are subject to federal regulation (and they aren't issuing any federal permits for their manufacture and sale to hunters) then it's no longer a slippery slope argument because it's actually happening today. California's Governor has those two laws (and several other gun related laws as well) sitting on his desk right now waiting for his signature and he is probably going to sign them.

The slippery slope argument is when it's conjecture as to how things may go, not when they actually are happening the way of the slippery slope.
 
2013-09-16 06:37:33 PM
ok so i really haven't been following that much.  is there another shooter?  i hear on the news that there "might" be but thats all they are going with.  is this going to be another conspiracy to create paranoia with another gunman on the loose?
 
2013-09-16 06:38:02 PM

LesserEvil: Born Baptist ATHEIST-> (Confused about faith) -> 'Devout' Buddhist -> ?????


fixed
 
2013-09-16 06:39:49 PM
Nutpisit Suthamtewakul, owner of Happy Bowl Thai in White Settlement, said Alexis was "my best friend."

What a bizarre sentence.

\nutpisit
 
2013-09-16 06:40:17 PM
I think we should start using a massacre scale, akin to the Fujita scale for tornadoes (F0-F5) and the Saffir-Simpson hurricane scale (Category 1 - 5).

"S" could be the suffix, for "severity." I'll throw some numbers out there.

• S0: 2-3 deaths.
• S1: 4-6 deaths.
• S2: 6-10 deaths.
• S3: 10-20 deaths.
• S4: 20-40 deaths.
• S5: 40-80 deaths.
• S6: 80-150 deaths.
• S7: 150-500 deaths.
• S8: 500-1000 deaths.
• S9: 1000-5000 deaths.
• S10: 5000-25000 deaths.
• S11: 25000 - 100,000 deaths.
• S12: 100K - 500K deaths.
• S13: > 500K deaths
 
2013-09-16 06:40:46 PM

Radioactive Ass: lead bullets for hunting


I don't want to shoot what i'm going to eat with lead.

am currently looking into a taser hunting rod.
 
2013-09-16 06:40:46 PM

James10952001: Cletus C.: PainfulItching: Take away one type of gun = open yourself up to losing all guns
Take away one freedom = open yourself up to losing all freedom

Do I have that argument right?

Yes you do. It's called a slippery slope argument and generally is employed by people who have nothing.

And this here is slapping a name on the argument and casually dismissing it as old and busted, as is often done by people who have nothing.

"I don't have a sensible counter debate, therefore your analogy is wrong or has been used before and you are an idiot"


I was just pointing out how changing one word can make different people froth excitedly.
 
2013-09-16 06:41:38 PM
theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-09-16 06:42:17 PM
And yet you people will demand more and more freedoms. The only way to stop these tragedies is to increase safety. Doing so comes with a cost, and that cost is freedom.

We should be demanding the government remove our Rights and protect us, 'lest this happen again.
 
2013-09-16 06:42:40 PM

Isitoveryet: Radioactive Ass: lead bullets for hunting

I don't want to shoot what i'm going to eat with lead.

am currently looking into a taser hunting rod.


Enjoy your vegetables.
 
2013-09-16 06:43:19 PM

PainfulItching: So their role in a situation like today is probably already determined. That's not what I was talking about.

I was talking about the personnel described here who would have no defined role, and would be able to roam free if they felt like disobeying orders to evacuate an area and try to become a hero. This is who everyone is talking about. The A Team, Chuck Norris, and Rambo. The superhero that the people sitting at a keyboard spitting up about this issue think could have taken this guy out with the .45 stashed in their desk drawer like on TV.


I was specifically addressing why the armory doesn't issue small arms to just anyone. Back when personal weapons were allowed for carrying as a part of the uniform the person still had to be qualified in its use through the navy before it would be allowed on base. Concealed weapons were never allowed unless it was a part of their duties. Plain clothed NIS or FBI agents for example.
 
2013-09-16 06:44:00 PM

PainfulItching: Isitoveryet: Radioactive Ass: lead bullets for hunting

I don't want to shoot what i'm going to eat with lead.

am currently looking into a taser hunting rod.

Enjoy your vegetables.


who in the hell hunts vegetables?
 
2013-09-16 06:44:53 PM

Surpheon: AngryDragon: Here's the best one I could find on short notice.  Yes it's true.

End Clinton-era military base gun ban

If only we had a pro-gun Republican Congress with a borderline cowboy Texan President for 8 years - I'm sure they would have done something about it.


Exactly. You never hear about Democrats biatching about Reagan or W since they have had so much time to reverse their policies. Only the right would pull such a low stunt.
 
2013-09-16 06:45:01 PM

Enemabag Jones: James10952001
So which guns? The proposed law banned a number I purely cosmetic features. Will that law reduce gun crime, or is it a stepping stone for the next tragedy to be used to pass still more restrictive laws?

I get this. If an AR15 were to become illegal to own, then would an SKS with a detachable mag or a mini-14 be used?

It would be a nice start if 30 round clips as a start could be made illegal even if they can be printed. Because last time I checked even that was not allowed to pass.

In 1986 full auto arm not grandfathered in were effectively made illegal for those of moderate incomes, but short of the temporary limitations in 1996 I don't remember a further clapdown on gunowners.


It didn't pass because it was bundled with other restrictions. None of these proposals has ever been a single item being voted on, it is an all or nothing event and different people oppose different portions for different reasons.

I don't personally care how large a magazine I can get, but knowing how readily available large magazines are already, how easy it would be to illegally modify a smaller magazine, and how easy it is to change a magazine for a full one (that's the point of magazines), I viewed it as a pointless provision and more of a talking point.

One of the challenges in banning certain types of guns is that types that are most often used for sport purposes are just as potentially deadly as types modeled after military weapons. You can't do much to restrict the killing ability of a gun without running afoul of the second amendment entirely, so they are left debating mostly cosmetic aspects, the other option being to come out and say the real goal is to ban all guns, which would be an about-face for all but the most zealous gun haters.
 
2013-09-16 06:46:03 PM
I was in the Air Force in the early 80s. I bought a 6 inch Gerber survival knife at the Base Exchange. I couldn't take it into the dorms as weapons were banned from the dorms. I locked it under my motorcycle seat when I was there. When I was traveling on or off base I carried it on my hip so I wasn't carrying a concealed  weapon. I was stopped at the front gate by a female gate guard who had no idea that it was allowed on base, and she called her sergeant out to the gate. He took me aside and told me I was doing the right thing, but to keep the knife from causing a problem I should put it under my seat when I came on base. I wonder what it's like on bases today.
 
2013-09-16 06:46:26 PM

Radioactive Ass: banning lead bullets for hunting which has the side effect of essentially banning hunting because all of the alternatives are considered armor piercing and are subject to federal regulation (and they aren't issuing any federal permits for their manufacture and sale to hunters)


The derp is strong with this one. Copper bullets may be a greater risk to start forest fires, but they are not regulated at all. Just another blatant lie from the right wing.

http://www.rifleshootermag.com/2011/12/15/boddington-on-non-lead-bul le ts/
http://huntingwithnonlead.org/bullet_types.html
 
2013-09-16 06:46:40 PM

Isitoveryet: PainfulItching: Isitoveryet: Radioactive Ass: lead bullets for hunting

I don't want to shoot what i'm going to eat with lead.

am currently looking into a taser hunting rod.

Enjoy your vegetables.

who in the hell hunts vegetables?


crayfisher.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-09-16 06:47:34 PM

doyner: Home safe.  Family freaked out.  All things considered, I'd rather have been in lockdown in building 201 than have had to flee 197 and get home sooner.


kity hugs u and your family
 
2013-09-16 06:48:18 PM
New information.  Shooter was discharged dishonorably for a shooting incident.  Disqualified from owning a firearm.

Enforce the existing laws goddamn it.
 
2013-09-16 06:48:18 PM

Obscene_CNN: Seems like he entered the navy yard with a shot gun then "upgraded" his weapon by taking new ones from the people he killed.


Was he playing Doom?
 
2013-09-16 06:49:27 PM

AngryDragon: New information.  Shooter was discharged dishonorably for a shooting incident.  Disqualified from owning a firearm.

Enforce the existing laws goddamn it.


According to local news here in Dallas, he was cited for an illegal discharge originally, but the charge was dropped when Fort Worth police deemed it an accident in the act of cleaning his firearm.
 
2013-09-16 06:50:20 PM

CheapEngineer: vrax: leevis: vrax: AngryDragon: vrax: AngryDragon: shower_in_my_socks: One man killed 12 people, just as the authors of the 2nd Amt intended. I eagerly await news of which well regulated militia he was member of so we can get to the bottom of this. The rest of the world thinks our gun laws and gun culture are crazy, and they are farking right.

Ironic that they don't let soldiers carry sidearms on a military installation isn't it?  The ultimate expression of a gun-free zone.

It's interesting that even the military sees the need for limits on when and where it's appropriate to carry weapons and yet people are fighting for the right to carry them everywhere out in public.

And this shows how effective this policy is.  It makes no sense that probably THE most trained force on the planet regarding firearms is not allowed to carry them.   It's a political decision not a common sense one.

Is it?  Who is the Navy trying to impress?

I wouldn't go so far as to consider the Navy THE most trained force on the planet regarding firearms. I think most of them only fire them at basic training.

Yeah, but he said their on-base disarmament is a political decision and not a common sense one, so it must be true.  I bet every one of those people on that yard was expertly trained in close-quarters, urban combat scenarios, and would instantly work as a perfect team in such a situation if only the Navy had allowed them to be armed.  Stupid Navy Democrats!

FTFY


i39.tinypic.com
 
2013-09-16 06:50:21 PM
Enemabag Jones:
In 1986 full auto arm not grandfathered in were effectively made illegal for those of moderate incomes, but short of the temporary limitations in 1996 I don't remember a further clapdown on gunowners.

The closing of the machine gun registry in '86 was another feel good/do nothing piece of legislation anyway. Since the inception of the NFA in 1934, there have only been three (yes, three) murders commited with legally registered machine guns. One of these was even a police officer, he killed his spouse with a select-fire AR. Just recently a man killed his wife with an auto Uzi, part of his collection, otherwise we were at two murders for around 30 years. These just aren't the weapons criminals buy or use.
 
Displayed 50 of 896 comments

First | « | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report