Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(Opposing Views)   "Holt and his friends were dry-firing the gun at each other for fun earlier in the day." Hmmm, I wonder how this story ends   (opposingviews.com ) divider line
    More: Florida, handguns, guns  
•       •       •

7704 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Dec 2013 at 9:42 AM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-12-05 01:10:13 PM  

HeadLever: Hung Like A Tic-Tac: Like the government couldn't do that now if it wanted to.

It could try, but without a nice little list to go by, it woudn't get too many of them.


Yea, sure.
 
2013-12-05 01:14:30 PM  

Hung Like A Tic-Tac: Yea, sure.


Until they suspend a pile of due process rights along with the 2nd Amendment, they are not going to get very far.  If they do suspend the 4th and 2nd, citizens are going to be just a tad bit irritated.
 
2013-12-05 01:16:00 PM  

ButtercupKitteh: i didn't realize you could get out of murder if the victim's family didn't press charges. I've seen articles about people killing people in self defense and it still being a murder case of some sort.
Shouldn't the owner of the gun here be charged with something at least? Like not having his weapon secured properly or something.
I'd also like to know why the hell they decided to load the gun after it being empty apparently all day, what were they planning to do with it?


It wasn't murder. There was no intent or malice.
At worse it was manslaughter, as she was being an idiot by pointing a "unloaded" firearm at someone and pulling the trigger as a prank. All the witnesses gave the same story and the family spoke in favor of the girl. Yeah they could still prosecute, but since the family isn't making a fuss the DA will probably save the man hours.
 
2013-12-05 01:17:13 PM  

Hung Like A Tic-Tac: Yea, sure.


Also, how are they gonig to find all of those guns that I lost in that bad boating accident a few years ago?  Are they going to start dredging every lake in the nation?  Or are they going to just take my word for it?  Or are they going to unsucessfully search my home anyway?

Their choice.  Doesn't matter to me.
 
2013-12-05 01:18:53 PM  

Secret Master of All Flatulence: cptjeff: Then why the hell does the NRA and whatnot oppose universal background checks?

It's extremely simple:  It's to prevent a backdoor "Universal Gun Registry".  Gun registration is a necessary precursor to gun confiscation. And before you say "that's never happened!" look at California's SKS Registry, and what New York is doing now with their post Sandy Hook" idiocy.  Gun owners have been screwed over and over again by the anti gunners, who say one thing, and then push laws that do something else entirely.  That's what lead to the whole "no more compromise" bit on the part of so many gun owners.  Gun Control advocates generally follow the principle of "slowly boiling the frog", but their general goal is to ban all guns, period.  That's why they're pushing the "assault weapons ban" stupidity, when the guns in question are generally used in something like 1/2 of 1 percent of crimes involving guns.  It's an attempt to condition people to the idea of taking away all guns, period.


1. States' Rights work that way. California is also getting firearms out of the hands of felons and the mentally ill.
2. "Screwed over and over"? Tell me, what's the term for the 100,000+ Americans who develop bullet holes every year?
3. I'm all for an "Assault Weapons Ban." The Militia restored will need weapons designed to kill the enemy, and .30-06 or .308 fills the ticket better than 5.54 or 5.56.
4. Pistols are a menace to society. That's why we took them away from lieutenants.
5. Your right to bear arms is subordinate to other people's right to go about their business bullethole-free.
 
2013-12-05 01:19:06 PM  

HeadLever: Hung Like A Tic-Tac: Yea, sure.

Until they suspend a pile of due process rights along with the 2nd Amendment, they are not going to get very far.  If they do suspend the 4th and 2nd, citizens are going to be just a tad bit irritated.


That doesn't change the fact that if the government wanted to take them, they could. I never said it would be done legally. This whole idea of a registration list being used as a step towards confiscation is bunk.
 
2013-12-05 01:21:05 PM  

syrynxx: Santa brought me one of these for Black Friday on sale for $550:
Adams Arms AR-15 Piston Upper Receiver

Well, maybe not Santa.  Who is the patron saint of BlackFridayThanksgivinnukah?  It was that guy.  It's going on a Colt A2 lower that has a SlideFire stock and a LMG Heavy Barrel upper already.


St. Garbriel Possenti (wiki) has been put forth to be the patron saint of handgunners, syrynxx. Will that work?  :D
 
2013-12-05 01:21:33 PM  

HeadLever: Hung Like A Tic-Tac: Yea, sure.

Until they suspend a pile of due process rights along with the 2nd Amendment, they are not going to get very far.  If they do suspend the 4th and 2nd, citizens are going to be just a tad bit irritated.


Like the 'terrorist watch list'? Due process won't stop them, they don't believe in that either.
 
2013-12-05 01:21:39 PM  

ChaosStar: That was my concern. I'm very happy you already addressed it.
/I hope she enjoys it


The vast majority of people who have seen the gun in question IRL are cops that I know personally.  The general first reaction has always been "WTF?!?" until I explain it to them, at which point the general reaction becomes "Oh, shiat, I didn't think of that."  Knowing me, they know that there's practically zero chance that the gun and/or flash suppressor would fall into "unauthorized" hands, and considering the other things that would fall into "unauthorized hands" if my security were to be breached (like a bunch of submachineguns, a few belt-fed real-life GPMGs, a bunch of sound suppressors, and some AOWs, all "papered") an orange flash suppressor on a semi-auto rifle is the least of their worries.
 
2013-12-05 01:23:10 PM  

Hung Like A Tic-Tac: HeadLever: Hung Like A Tic-Tac: Yea, sure.

Until they suspend a pile of due process rights along with the 2nd Amendment, they are not going to get very far.  If they do suspend the 4th and 2nd, citizens are going to be just a tad bit irritated.

That doesn't change the fact that if the government wanted to take them, they could. I never said it would be done legally. This whole idea of a registration list being used as a step towards confiscation is bunk.


Except that it's being done right now, which proves that it's, in fact, not bunk.
 
2013-12-05 01:24:31 PM  

Hung Like A Tic-Tac: That doesn't change the fact that if the government wanted to take them, they could. I never said it would be done legally.


If govenment worked outside the rule of law, you could protect your property in any way you see fit.  Might as well consider them an armed burgler at that point.  And they should be treated as such.
 
2013-12-05 01:26:02 PM  

Secret Master of All Flatulence: ChaosStar: That was my concern. I'm very happy you already addressed it.
/I hope she enjoys it

The vast majority of people who have seen the gun in question IRL are cops that I know personally.  The general first reaction has always been "WTF?!?" until I explain it to them, at which point the general reaction becomes "Oh, shiat, I didn't think of that."  Knowing me, they know that there's practically zero chance that the gun and/or flash suppressor would fall into "unauthorized" hands, and considering the other things that would fall into "unauthorized hands" if my security were to be breached (like a bunch of submachineguns, a few belt-fed real-life GPMGs, a bunch of sound suppressors, and some AOWs, all "papered") an orange flash suppressor on a semi-auto rifle is the least of their worries.


I'm going to assume you're either a class 3 manufacturer/dealer, had a family member buying all sorts of fun toys pre-1964, or you're independently wealthy.
Either way, party at your place? :D
 
2013-12-05 01:26:22 PM  

HeadLever: Hung Like A Tic-Tac: That doesn't change the fact that if the government wanted to take them, they could. I never said it would be done legally.

If govenment worked outside the rule of law, you could protect your property in any way you see fit.  Might as well consider them an armed burgler at that point.  And they should be treated as such.


Good luck with that.
 
2013-12-05 01:27:11 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: 4. Pistols are a menace to society. That's why we took them away from lieutenants.
5. Your right to bear arms is subordinate to other people's right to go about their business bullethole-free.


OK, I admit it, I LOLed at 4.  Regarding taking away my rights to prevent other people from sprouting GSWs:  Not So Much.  That argument can and has been used repeatedly to enable a Police State.  During the 20th Century, gun control was a necessary precursor to the murder of literally hundreds of millions of people.  We're talking literally about MOUNTAINS of dead human beings.  That's unacceptable, period.

If the Government can't trust us with our machineguns, why do we trust them with theirs?
 
2013-12-05 01:28:45 PM  

Ow! That was my feelings!: Like the 'terrorist watch list'? Due process won't stop them, they don't believe in that either


That is a major concern, but being placed on a watchlist and having issues at TSA checkpoints is a bit different than a complete suspension of search and seizure laws.

Utimlatly I agree and it may take anothe Ruby Ridge for them to see the value in strong Due Process rights.  I hope not, but they don't seem to be listening to us right now.

/pun somewhat intended
 
2013-12-05 01:30:25 PM  

stevarooni: St. Garbriel Possenti (wiki) has been put forth to be the patron saint of handgunners, syrynxx. Will that work? :D


I guess Ole Gabe will have to do. Although my first mental image of a Gabe is that 500-lb guy who runs Steam and he would never fit down my chimney.
 
2013-12-05 01:30:32 PM  

Hung Like A Tic-Tac: Good luck with that.


Tell them the same thing.
 
2013-12-05 01:33:27 PM  

Secret Master of All Flatulence: If the Government can't trust us with our  machineguns, why do we trust them with theirs?


Then registered. I'm OK with that.
 
2013-12-05 01:34:01 PM  

HeadLever: Ow! That was my feelings!: Like the 'terrorist watch list'? Due process won't stop them, they don't believe in that either

That is a major concern, but being placed on a watchlist and having issues at TSA checkpoints is a bit different than a complete suspension of search and seizure laws.

Utimlatly I agree and it may take anothe Ruby Ridge for them to see the value in strong Due Process rights.  I hope not, but they don't seem to be listening to us right now.

/pun somewhat intended


Ok, my point was more basic. That many Democrats want to use the 'terrorism watch list' for a lot more than just denying individuals a right to travel, they want to use it to deny citizens their 2A rights, among other things.
 
2013-12-05 01:34:17 PM  

Secret Master of All Flatulence: OK, I admit it, I LOLed at 4.


3 made me lol. I would say that there is no way he is serious, but I have seen gun control advocates seriously push for things that are even more retarded.
 
2013-12-05 01:35:11 PM  

stevarooni: cptjeff: Then why the hell does the NRA and whatnot oppose universal background checks? They're fighting to keep the loopholes that allow violent criminals to walk into a gun show and just randomly buy a gun in a private sale open.

Why go to a gun show when you can just find some dude on the street who will sell to you, no questions asked...which would also occur if background checks were mandated by the law?


You realize that it's nowhere near that simple to buy an illegal gun, right? They have to know who you are, you have to know who they are. They're not going to sell to a guy who might be an undercover cop, and if you don't know the reputation of the guy selling it to you, he's going to screw you over, and probably just mug you and take your money.

No solution is ever going to be perfect. But why not make the situation better?

Secret Master of All Flatulence: It's extremely simple:  It's to prevent a backdoor "Universal Gun Registry".  Gun registration is a necessary precursor to gun confiscation.


Ah, black helicopters stupidity. That's why.

Do you really think that the vast majority of the US Congress agreeing with you, along with explicit provisions in the bill prohibiting the usage of the data for any type of registry, isn't going to sufficient protection? You're not a tiny, persecuted group. The US Government and society is pro gun. Some of us are just asking for a little farking sanity. Like trying to make it much harder for convicted felons to buy guns.

If you don't want to try and solve the problem, just say so. Don't rattle off some bullcrap about how you want to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. Because you're fighting to allow criminals easy access to guns.
 
2013-12-05 01:36:33 PM  

Secret Master of All Flatulence: If the Government can't trust us with our machineguns, why do we trust them with theirs?


(They're locked up in guarded armories and issued only to people extensively trained in their safe use.)

And there are people I don't trust with a dull spork, let alone a firearm.
 
2013-12-05 01:39:26 PM  

cptjeff: They're not going to sell to a guy who might be an undercover cop,


That'll come as a surprise to a lot of undercover cops.
 
2013-12-05 01:39:36 PM  

cptjeff: Ah, black helicopters stupidity. That's why.


Why would they want that information when it is not necessary to the task at hand?
 
2013-12-05 01:40:35 PM  

umad: Secret Master of All Flatulence: OK, I admit it, I LOLed at 4.

3 made me lol. I would say that there is no way he is serious, but I have seen gun control advocates seriously push for things that are even more retarded.


You'd take an M4 over an M14, even-Steven body armor?
 
2013-12-05 01:42:04 PM  

ChaosStar: I'm going to assume you're either a class 3 manufacturer/dealer, had a family member buying all sorts of fun toys pre-1964, or you're independently wealthy.
Either way, party at your place? :D


Retired 01/03 FFL/SOT here.  I'd like to shoot a lot more than I do nowadays.  I've got plenty of ammo that I put away in the '80s and '90s, but don't shoot ammo I can't afford to replace unless it's absolutely necessary, and current ammo prices are what they are.
 
2013-12-05 01:42:23 PM  

R.A.Danny: demaL-demaL-yeH: R.A.Danny: They fought against the part where the checks were going to be used as de facto registration.

So farking what? The farking Founders did it with arms (Return of the Militia).

This crap again? Bah blah SCOTUS blah blah Miller ruling BLAH BLAH BLAH


SCOTUS did not. Congre$$ did.
 
2013-12-05 01:44:36 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: cptjeff: They're not going to sell to a guy who might be an undercover cop,

That'll come as a surprise to a lot of undercover cops.


Most actual undercover cops actually know what they're doing and aren't just walking up to guy on the street and asking, "hey, know where I can get a gun?". They spend a whole lot of time building credibility and making sure the other guy is sure that they aren't an undercover cop before they try to pull a sting like that.
 
2013-12-05 01:46:20 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: (They're locked up in guarded armories and issued only to people extensively trained in their safe use.)



Suggestion:  Take a walk through a parking lot with a bunch of cop cars in them.  You'll generally see a whole bunch of M4 carbines, complete with "giggle switches", sitting upright and unattended with only a rudimentary locking system keeping them out of "unauthorized" hands.  "Guarded armories" my ass.
 
2013-12-05 01:48:22 PM  

Secret Master of All Flatulence: demaL-demaL-yeH: (They're locked up in guarded armories and issued only to people extensively trained in their safe use.)


Suggestion:  Take a walk through a parking lot with a bunch of cop cars in them.  You'll generally see a whole bunch of M4 carbines, complete with "giggle switches", sitting upright and unattended with only a rudimentary locking system keeping them out of "unauthorized" hands.  "Guarded armories" my ass.


That's not a machine gun. They aren't even - with extremely limited exceptions - full auto.
 
2013-12-05 01:48:50 PM  

cptjeff: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: cptjeff: They're not going to sell to a guy who might be an undercover cop,

That'll come as a surprise to a lot of undercover cops.

Most actual undercover cops actually know what they're doing and aren't just walking up to guy on the street and asking, "hey, know where I can get a gun?". They spend a whole lot of time building credibility and making sure the other guy is sure that they aren't an undercover cop before they try to pull a sting like that.


agrees.
i.lv3.hbo.com
 
2013-12-05 01:51:59 PM  
Dumb biatch obvious knows nothing of gun safety, Never point a gun at something your not going to shoot, especially another human being.   and nevr assume a gun is unloaded, always treat it as if it was loaded.
 
2013-12-05 01:52:39 PM  

HeadLever: topcon: Your kids would have to be pretty stupid to confuse a water gun and a real gun.

Yes and no.  For kids that grew up in houses that have real guns and where they have been taught the difference and that real guns need to be hadled only with an adult around, you are correct.

However, many folks never talk about real guns and will never teach their kids how to respect the power of one.  These are the kids really don't know the difference.


There are plenty of guns in my house (most of which are unloaded and locked up) and my kid gets plenty of education about how to handle guns, but I still insist that whenever he plays with a toy gun he adheres as closely as possible to the four rules of gun safety. I even get to hear him correcting his peers about muzzle and trigger discipline.

It's my belief that get lax when handling anything that looks or feels like a gun will eventually lead to an unconscious tendency to be lax with the real thing. Conversely, if you discipline yourself to be more careful you may find that you're keeping your finger off the trigger of a spray bottle or drill, but you're also much less likely to have a tragic moment of inattention with a firearm.

scontent-a.xx.fbcdn.net
 
2013-12-05 01:52:50 PM  
This just in! stupid people do stupid stuff! Do you think training would have prevented dumb things from happening?  Guns put holes in things.  How hard of a concept is that to grasp?  People get reckless and they get hurt or killed.  That is every kid driving down a country road at 3 a.m. at 90 mph and wiping out.

Secret Master of All Flatulence: It's extremely simple:  It's to prevent a backdoor "Universal Gun Registry".  Gun registration is a necessary precursor to gun confiscation.

Ah, black helicopters stupidity. That's why.

Do you really think that the vast majority of the US Congress agreeing with you, along with explicit provisions in the bill prohibiting the usage of the data for any type of registry, isn't going to sufficient protection? You're not a tiny, persecuted group. The US Government and society is pro gun. Some of us are just asking for a little farking sanity. Like trying to make it much harder for convicted felons to buy guns.

If you don't want to try and solve the problem, just say so. Don't rattle off some bullcrap about how you want to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. Because you're fighting to allow criminals easy access to guns.


Pro gun? The US govt is pro gun?  I think that would have to do on how much opposition there is against it.  Hillary and Sen. Frankenstien have already said they want them gone.  Chicagobama kept CCW out of Illinois til the supreme court forced them to do it, and they are still trying to fight it. The American people might be pro-gun, but powers that be in our government are very polarized against it.
 
2013-12-05 01:52:55 PM  

Ow! That was my feelings!: Ok, my point was more basic. That many Democrats want to use the 'terrorism watch list' for a lot more than just denying individuals a right to travel, they want to use it to deny citizens their 2A rights, among other things.


I'm waiting for one party in a nasty divorce to use another party's taking of underaged children through a TSA checkpoint as the basis for denying the other party any form of child custody, on the basis of demonstrating willingness to have the child sexually assaulted by TSA screeners.  Sooner or later, it'll happen.
 
2013-12-05 02:00:50 PM  

JesseL: There are plenty of guns in my house (most of which are unloaded and locked up) and my kid gets plenty of education about how to handle guns, but I still insist that whenever he plays with a toy gun he adheres as closely as possible to the four rules of gun safety. I even get to hear him correcting his peers about muzzle and trigger discipline.

It's my belief that get lax when handling anything that looks or feels like a gun will eventually lead to an unconscious tendency to be lax with the real thing. Conversely, if you discipline yourself to be more careful you may find that you're keeping your finger off the trigger of a spray bottle or drill, but you're also much less likely to have a tragic moment of inattention with a firearm.

[scontent-a.xx.fbcdn.net image 720x960]


Nice carbine. Did you redo the stock?
 
2013-12-05 02:05:00 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: Suggestion:  Take a walk through a parking lot with a bunch of cop cars in them.  You'll generally see a whole bunch of M4 carbines, complete with "giggle switches", sitting upright and unattended with only a rudimentary locking system keeping them out of "unauthorized" hands.  "Guarded armories" my ass.

That's not a machine gun. They aren't even - with extremely limited exceptions - full auto.


Using what definition of "machinegun"?  I generally operate on the whole "fires more than one round with a single pull of the trigger" definition, which doesn't cover semi-autos, but does cover guns with a "burst" and true "full auto" capabiliity.  I don't know where you are, but where I am, the guns in question most certainly ARE "machineguns" under my definition.  And yes, I've both examined the guns in question closely AND actually fired them.
 
2013-12-05 02:06:59 PM  
Oh, and BTW:  I generally operate on the "If it requires a Form 10, it's a machinegun" assumption.
 
2013-12-05 02:13:43 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: JesseL: There are plenty of guns in my house (most of which are unloaded and locked up) and my kid gets plenty of education about how to handle guns, but I still insist that whenever he plays with a toy gun he adheres as closely as possible to the four rules of gun safety. I even get to hear him correcting his peers about muzzle and trigger discipline.

It's my belief that get lax when handling anything that looks or feels like a gun will eventually lead to an unconscious tendency to be lax with the real thing. Conversely, if you discipline yourself to be more careful you may find that you're keeping your finger off the trigger of a spray bottle or drill, but you're also much less likely to have a tragic moment of inattention with a firearm.

[scontent-a.xx.fbcdn.net image 720x960]

Nice carbine. Did you redo the stock?


It's actually a brand new gun in .22lr. http://www.legacysports.com/m-1-22-carbine

I won it in a contest earlier this year - and if you read those links you'll see why I felt like a total dick for accepting. My wife and kid have laid their own claims on it though so I don't feel as bad.
 
2013-12-05 02:16:13 PM  
Now that's what I call an alibi.
 
2013-12-05 02:16:18 PM  

Secret Master of All Flatulence: demaL-demaL-yeH: Suggestion:  Take a walk through a parking lot with a bunch of cop cars in them.  You'll generally see a whole bunch of M4 carbines, complete with "giggle switches", sitting upright and unattended with only a rudimentary locking system keeping them out of "unauthorized" hands.  "Guarded armories" my ass.

That's not a machine gun. They aren't even - with extremely limited exceptions - full auto.

Using what definition of "machinegun"?  I generally operate on the whole "fires more than one round with a single pull of the trigger" definition, which doesn't cover semi-autos, but does cover guns with a "burst" and true "full auto" capabiliity.  I don't know where you are, but where I am, the guns in question most certainly ARE "machineguns" under my definition.  And yes, I've both examined the guns in question closely AND actually fired them.



I think we can all agree that they are assault weapon rifles with the things that go up, right?  And I'm sure we can all agree that the only people that should be trusted with them are trained professionals.

media.salon.com
 
2013-12-05 02:22:10 PM  

GanjSmokr: think we can all agree that they are assault weapon rifles with the things that go up, right?  And I'm sure we can all agree that the only people that should be trusted with them are trained professionals.


What would lead you to believe that I consider civilians who call other civilians "civilians" are trained professionals?
Idiots who play dress-up soldier and act like thugs are about as far from professional as you can get.
 
2013-12-05 02:24:07 PM  

GanjSmokr: Secret Master of All Flatulence: demaL-demaL-yeH: Suggestion:  Take a walk through a parking lot with a bunch of cop cars in them.  You'll generally see a whole bunch of M4 carbines, complete with "giggle switches", sitting upright and unattended with only a rudimentary locking system keeping them out of "unauthorized" hands.  "Guarded armories" my ass.

That's not a machine gun. They aren't even - with extremely limited exceptions - full auto.

Using what definition of "machinegun"?  I generally operate on the whole "fires more than one round with a single pull of the trigger" definition, which doesn't cover semi-autos, but does cover guns with a "burst" and true "full auto" capabiliity.  I don't know where you are, but where I am, the guns in question most certainly ARE "machineguns" under my definition.  And yes, I've both examined the guns in question closely AND actually fired them.

I think we can all agree that they are assault weapon rifles with the things that go up, right?  And I'm sure we can all agree that the only people that should be trusted with them are trained professionals.

[media.salon.com image 750x500]


Common sense establishes that assault weapons are suitable only for mass murder, which is why they should be prohibited to all but members of law enforcement.
 
2013-12-05 02:31:39 PM  

Dimensio: Common sense establishes that assault weapons are suitable only for mass murder, which is why they should be prohibited to all but members of law enforcement.


We can discuss the merits of this idea or the lack thereof, but first we must settle on what defines an assault weapon.  Do you mean a weapon capable of firing fully automatically which chambers an intermediate cartridge, or are you just talking about semi-automatic rifles?
 
2013-12-05 02:33:28 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: GanjSmokr: think we can all agree that they are assault weapon rifles with the things that go up, right?  And I'm sure we can all agree that the only people that should be trusted with them are trained professionals.

What would lead you to believe that I consider civilians who call other civilians "civilians" are trained professionals?
Idiots who play dress-up soldier and act like thugs are about as far from professional as you can get.



Police are not considered "civilians" by the common definition of "civilian"... or did you mean something else?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/civilian

ci·vil·ian
 noun \sə-ˈvil-yən  also -ˈvi-yən\
: a person who is not a member of the military or of a police or firefighting force


/yes, word definitions change.  Let's change this one now too so it can mean whatever the hell we want it to mean.
 
2013-12-05 02:34:30 PM  

HeadLever: Smidge204: Tell that to the people who protest background checks

Who would that be?


The National Rifle Association, for starters.

I'm sure if I spend more than zero seconds looking, I can find some examples of people opposed to even existing, meager background check requirements.


HeadLever: This, for your information, is called Due Process. Maybe you should look it up.


Yes... and Due Process would prevent absolutely everything you just mentioned. are you against permitting, licensing and registering firearms too? What if they decide a permit should cost $25,000?


Secret Master of All Flatulence: I'm pretty sure that if you're currently in jail on a felony conviction, you're not allowed to own a gun, either.


So you're just going to glance over the fact that there are millions of citizens that are neither in jail nor allowed to vote, huh?
=Smidge=
 
2013-12-05 02:34:50 PM  

metatronarchetype: We can discuss the merits of this idea or the lack thereof, but first we must settle on what defines an assault weapon.  Do you mean a weapon capable of firing fully automatically which chambers an intermediate cartridge, or are you just talking about semi-automatic rifles?


He's most likely using the "If it can be used for a random drive-by bayonetting, it's an assault weapon."  OTOH, he may be using the British definition of "assault weapon", which includes glass beer mugs.
 
2013-12-05 02:36:58 PM  

metatronarchetype: Dimensio: Common sense establishes that assault weapons are suitable only for mass murder, which is why they should be prohibited to all but members of law enforcement.

We can discuss the merits of this idea or the lack thereof, but first we must settle on what defines an assault weapon.  Do you mean a weapon capable of firing fully automatically which chambers an intermediate cartridge, or are you just talking about semi-automatic rifles?


My understanding is that the presence of a pistol grip, a threaded barrel or an adjustable stock transforms a conventional hunting or target rifle into a deadly assault weapon. However, I also understand that some California lawmakers have sought to expand the definition to include any semi-automatic rifle fed from a detachable magazine.
 
2013-12-05 02:38:43 PM  

Dimensio: My understanding is that the presence of a pistol grip, a threaded barrel or an adjustable stock transforms a conventional hunting or target rifle into a deadly assault weapon. However, I also understand that some California lawmakers have sought to expand the definition to include any semi-automatic rifle fed from a detachable magazine.


But what do you think?  You said it's common sense that assault weapons are only suitable for mass murder.  When you formed this opinion, what was it that you were thinking of?
 
2013-12-05 02:41:10 PM  
Smidge204:
So you're just going to glance over the fact that there are millions of citizens that are neither in jail nor allowed to vote, huh?
=Smidge=


Given what I posted about only 9 states still with any form of voting restrictions on convicted felons that aren't actually serving their sentence, it's what's considered to be the "minority rule" from a legal perspective.
 
Displayed 50 of 417 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report