Purchasing firearms/New assault weapons ban
Offline Obama is our new president, and I fear that will present some problems for gun owners and future gun owners. Obama has repeatedly said he wants a permanent assault weapons ban, has supported banning the sale or transfer of any form of semi-automatic firearm, supports a national ban on concealed carry, and supports a ban on the possession of handguns. Most of the bans he want probably can not pass the legislator, but with a democratic legislator supporting him, I don't see how the dems can fail to re-institute the assault weapons ban at least. This has forced me to accelerate my plans to purchase a firearm. On the off-chance that the gun I want will be on the list of banned guns I need to buy it within a few months. I was wondering if anyone else on this site was fearing a further erosion of the 2nd amendment and perhaps thinking of purchasing firearms soon in order to be grandfathered in if their gun is later defined as an assault weapon. For the time being we still have Heller vs D.C. to protect us, so until Obama gets to make Supreme Court appointments I don't see any major loss of gun rights. Any thoughts or comment on this matter are welcome.
Also: I'm not a gun nut or a tin-hatter, I know that Obama can not ban all guns even if he wants to. Of all the things he wants involving gun control, I only predict that a renewal of the assault weapon's ban will happen.
"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."
British General Charles Napier while in India
- Login to post comments
Or you could perhaps actually do the research. I don't know, maybe this is just one of my silly little logical phases.
Here, I'll even Help you; Kennesaw, Georgia
Once more, you make all these claims and yet never actually back them up. Your comment on legal scholars is nothing more than an appeal to authority, furthermore your statement that they are divided seems to me to hint that this is not a cut and dry issue. Huh, funny that. Your comments on Switzerland ammount to a use of the No True Scotsman Fallacy or just blatantly ignoring the entire country.
As for Massechusettes, good for them. I'm all for harsh punishment (but not cruel and unusual like the brutal sadism you advocate for everything) for people who own guns illegally.
Out of Curiosity, are you capable of responding without the use of swear words? Because right now you seem to be acting like a teenager. I'm going to have to challenge you to back up your claims and prove I am an Asshat.
I also liked how you completely ignored my comment that you show many of the signs of being Sociopathic, congratulations.
You perfectly described your entire social outlook here;
In other words, you've chosen what examples you like and any example that runs even slightly contrary to any of them is ignored and labelled 'irrational', or you insist that it must just be 'a story'.
Once again, you have completely ignored the possibility that it might actually not be the guns that cause the crime, but the fact that the people are uneducated, and poor. Neither of those things have anything to do with guns, and there are a million other possible factors. But of course its obviously still the guns fault. So explain to me why the homicide rate in Switzerland is just over half that of England, Denmark and France, roughly the same but still lower than Sweden and Norway, and one third that of Finland. Taken from Here
As for the Sates, according to this from just a cursory glance and some quick mental math It seems most of the states average at about 4-6, not too bad I guess. It does indeed seem that the north is generally less riddled with crime, but once again, there's a much greater difference between the north and the south than just one side having guns. To state otherwise is to cheapen the human condition and show a great lack of understanding for social dynamics. Ironically enough, Maryland and Louisiana are tied for second place at 10, with DC taking first by a factor of over 3.
Again, I've done my research. Have you?
When you say it like that you make it sound so Sinister...
How about three links, one of which is a police forum.
http://digg.com/politics/25_years_murder_free_in_Gun_Town_USA
http://libervative.wordpress.com/2007/04/21/gun-town-usa-vs-gun-free-zone/
http://www.masscops.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28950
Still want to bury your head in the sand like a fundy and pretend that the evidence doesn't exist? I can give you the telephone number of a newspaper editor friend of mine in Georgia if you like. I'm sure that he could give you even more stats and details. But I suspect that you will remain true to form and ignore the evidence. Then again, if you had an ounce of integrity, you would actually look up the town and see for yourself instead of acting like a coward and dismissing it out of hand.
Up until recently, the District of Columbia ( as in Washington D.C. ) had some of the toughest gun laws in the nation. One could even call those laws draconian. Now, guess which state ( if you can call it a state ) has the highest rate of gun deaths in the nation. C'mon, guess! Those damned gap toothed rednecks in D. mother fucking C. have the highest rates of gun deaths in the nation. And not only that, they also have the highest violent crime rates in the nation.
http://www.swivel.com/data_sets/spreadsheet/1003600
http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/US_States_Rate_Ranking.html
Now, have you ever heard of Vermont? Sure you have. And did you know that Vermont allows citizens to carry a concealed handgun without a permit? Your ' civilized ' Massachusetts rates # 20 for violent crime,whereas gun tote'n redneck Vermont comes in near dead last at # 50.
When it comes to murder, " civilized " New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and California come in at 29, 27, 38, and 11, respectively. And those redneck Vermonters? They come in at # 51. The only state with lower murder rates is North Dakota, a state with some of the most lax gun laws in the nation.
A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
It doesn't take a legal scholar to understand the words right and people. It takes a fucking retard to pretend that the amendment was not referring to the citizens, and not a federal military.
Barbaric Switzerland rates # 56 out of the 62 countries listed when it comes to murder rates by country. Compare this to civilized England ( # 46 ), France ( # 40 ), Denmark ( # 53 ), Finland ( # 30 ), Iceland ( # 42 ), Norway ( # 54 ), and Netherlands ( # 51 ). Even Canada ( Yes, I know that Canada isn't in Europe ) has a higher murder rate than Switzerland, coming in at number 44 on the list. Now what was this bullshit about " civilized Europe " again?
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita
Or maybe we will get lucky, Obama will turn out to be a real patriot, and have Nazi's like you declared traitors, rounded up, and executed. We all have our dreams.
Now, Matt Shitzzle, I have shot down your moronic, knee jerk, unfounded pack of lies with pure, unadulterated facts. So far you have delivered nothing but frothing at the mouth, irrational " Kill the gun owners " crap that is incredibly similar to the fundy screaming " Die murderer! " while shooting at a doctor at an abortion clinic. You behave like a zealot, a mindless fanatic spewing forth hate filled vomit you mistake as valid argument. Do you have the balls, the brains, or even the vagina to answer me with reason? I seriously doubt it, but once again, we all have our dreams.
It takes a village to raise an idiot.
Save a tree, eat a vegetarian.
Sometimes " The Majority " only means that all the fools are on the same side.
BTW, if we only read the second amendment, it is certainly debatable what the sentence implies. However, if you can recall studying the Revolutionary War in middle school: average citizens took their rifles, casually formed groups, and gave the British army hell. When we consider the historical context involved in the creation of the U.S. Consitution, I think the meaning is obvious, that the right of the average citizen to bear arms shall not be infringed.
If anyone wanted to establish a totalitarian government, perhaps the primary initial goal would be to destroy the implications of the first two amendments in the Bill of Rights.
- Take away freedom of expression.
- Take away the ability of the people to fight back.
And, wouldn't you know it? Matt's dystopia adequately covers both objectives.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
Wow, Matt, not that anyone on this forum wasn't aware aware of your views, but thanks for sharing! Your tolerance is amazing. (sarcasm). If you hate capitalism visit North Korea. Their central planning is working true wonders for the economy, and guess what - North Korea has the stictest gun control laws in the world. Sounds to me like your version of paradise! Nice to know that you consider me the scum of the earth. I wonder what would've happened if your mother had an abortion while pregnant with you... wait - you wouldn't be here! What a shame that would've been!!!... On the gun issue your blinded stubborn claim that all gun-owners are uneducated racist rednecks has been proven wrong time and time again by other posters. Now, will you have the guts to acknowledge you were wrong?
What's the difference between Texas and Saudi Arabia? In Texas they execute you for murder, in Saudi Arabia they excecute you for having a Xmass tree.
"An armed society is a polite society."
-Robert A. Heinlein
What happened to gun related accidents?
I presume you are referring to an M203 ?
( low velocity 40x46mm )
LMT M-2033003, yep. Would add a pic, but I don't have any of it online. I used to have a laser sight underneath the Tommy, but it was impractical, not to mention far less intimidating.
Ummm, not saying that the M-203 is practical. Just saying that the laser sight wasn't.
It takes a village to raise an idiot.
Save a tree, eat a vegetarian.
Sometimes " The Majority " only means that all the fools are on the same side.
Dunno. Maybe all crime ceased in the town after kids found the pistols and shot everybody. No people = no crime. Works for me!
It takes a village to raise an idiot.
Save a tree, eat a vegetarian.
Sometimes " The Majority " only means that all the fools are on the same side.
I'd have to disagree with that. The US is among the most armed societies there is and look how fucking rude we are. Mideast isn't too polite either. When I think of the most polite societies I can think of I think of Japan and the UK. Check both their gun laws. I know in Japan any sort of gun ownership is illegal.
Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team
A polite society is a very scared society, give me a rude and unafraid one
And please don't libel us Brit's as polite we are rude and proud of it
. Of course rude is often just another world for honest
And it seems I will have to disagree with damn near everything you say. Given that we have clearly established that you blindly ignore any evidence that contradicts your massive house of cards that are your beliefs I think we can confidently say that anything you say is likely retardedly wrong or at least ill-developed.
Its amazing how quickly you changed tracks. Now that you have clearly lost the 'gun ownership = murderous rampage' argument you instantly jump to a new argument and blatantly ignore every post showing you just how retarded you are. I've seen this strategy somewhere before, where was it? Oh yeah, Creationists and Fundamentalists love this tactic. Have you read the posts between your last two possts? Of course not. Or if you have, you certainly aren't going to respond to them. I'm still waiting for a response to my post in the FSTDT thread.
Furthermore Matt, Prove that Americans are more rude than the British or the Japanese. With actual facts, not just vague words and your insistence. Until you can, I'm going to have to assume that this is just 'one of those internet stories' and thus ignore it.
Frankly Matt, you are really starting to annoy me. Why don't you grow up and actually start looking at the facts arrayed against you instead of sticking your fingers in your ears, crying, and running away. Just a 'polite' suggestion.
When you say it like that you make it sound so Sinister...
What I don't understand is why are you so keen on guns? They have no use other than to kill. What use could you possibly have for wanting one. Lets be honest all cards on the table, who has ever had to use one?
I have no real problem with people owning guns I just don't understand why you would want to. However please tell me this isn't true do they sell guns and ammo at wallmart etc? That is Batshit crazy. I belive in America all you basically have to do is fill in a form to get a gun license once again that is crazy. Btw there can be no reason for anything more than a hand gun or hunting rifle.
Some reasonable restrictions that should be in place if they arn't already in place
No one with a crimanal recored should be able to have a gun.
If you want to have a gun you have to pass a Psychological exam.
You must declare your reason for buying a gun. (So unless they say to kill people its a way to get crimanals behind bars longer)
No one under the age of 25 can own a gun.
You can own a maximum of 2 guns.
You may not have more than one extra cartridge of ammo. (except at the shooting range)
These are just a few that wouldn't in anyway stop you from defending yourself and stop a few less stable people from legally owning one.
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
Technically in place, if you have a criminal record your not allowed to LEGALLY buy one
Heh... Have you ever taken a psych test? They're comical at best
You buy a car to get to work, doesnt mean you wont use it to drive to the beach one day. Besides... what would you do if they actually admitted to wanting it, for the purpose of killing people? deny them?
age =/= intelligence
Although those extra years do tend to show which side of the coin you belong to.
You just try and take my third gun...
Feeling lucky?
Revolvers, Tube-fed, and Belt-fed work around that quite nicely ;-p but its also not something you'll EVER have control over.
What Would Kharn Do?
true and no matter what this will always be a problem
also true but what they can do is look if you have a history of violence
Yup say no gun for you, it’s not a joking matter. If they do use it to kill someone and they said they wouldn't add ten years to the sentence (with reasonable exceptions e.g. self defense.) I'm just like that longer sentences for violent crime FTW!
Intelligence has nothing to do about it, It is about making it harder for university students have them. I don't know what the legal age is in America for owning a gun is I assume it's 21, I do happen to know in some states the legal drinking age is 21. Anyone else think that’s weird I feel that guns require more responsibility than alcohol.
So no real argument over this one? I don't think there can be. I mean what is the point of owning 30 guns?
Ok this I do see my lack of thought, you can't control it so instead I will suggest you can only buy one box or whatever a week. (Except at shooting ranges and the bullets must be used in the shooting range. you can't take them out.)
true and no matter what this will always be a problem
also true but what they can do is look if you have a history of violence
Yup say no gun for you, it’s not a joking matter. If they do use it to kill someone and they said they wouldn't add ten years to the sentence (with reasonable exceptions e.g. self defense.) I'm just like that longer sentences for violent crime FTW!
Intelligence has nothing to do about it, It is about making it harder for university students have them. I don't know what the legal age is in America for owning a gun is I assume it's 21, I do happen to know in some states the legal drinking age is 21. Anyone else think that’s weird I feel that guns require more responsibility than alcohol.
So no real argument over this one? I don't think there can be. I mean what is the point of owning 30 guns?
Ok this I do see my lack of thought, you can't control it so instead I will suggest you can only buy one box or whatever a week. (Except at shooting ranges and the bullets must be used in the shooting range. you can't take them out.)
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
I think Dad likes his guns because it gives him a feeling of control over his life. It seems to be kinda like a security blanket for grown men who are part of the peasantry, but don't really want to acknowledge their lack of control over their lives and still feel powerful. There is also a practical side. He lives in a rural area where there are coyotes and rattlesnakes that threaten the animals. You could conceivably get a cougar that has wandered down out of the foothills too, although that's highly unlikely. This would just apply to someone who doesn't hunt. Hunters would likely be able to give you good additional reasons.
I'm not a real big advocate of people owning guns, but have modified my stance considerably since reading Deer Hunting With Jesus. The author does a really good job of explaining why guns are so important to a certain segment of the U.S. population. It's a popular enough book that I bet your library has it. (It's a good read for other reasons too. )
I would note that gun laws vary considerably from state to state. Most states that I know of do have waiting periods and background checks for people buying guns.
"I am that I am." - Proof that the writers of the bible were beyond stoned.
Sounds psycho doesn't it ? I own several rifles and one handgun. I enjoy owning these and do not feel the need to use them in defense. I also live in wooded northern Minnesota where most of us hunt for food. MMM... venison, rabbit, grouse and the list goes on. fishing is great too!!
Assault weapons should never have been available in the first place. I can understand a handgun in the US, especially when considering issues brought up in the other thread, but noone needs an AK to defend themselves or hunt. Every time it's even mentioned I remember the movie "The Distinguished Gentleman", where Eddie Murphy stands there watching in a kind of shock as a few hunters unload 3000+ bullets into a flock of ducks, hitting one. Eddie's comment? "Must have had a heart attack".
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
The origional post was asking if this was a good time to buy weapons. The answer is yes. It may not be possible in the near future. Reading some of the stupid comments made by the hoplophobes make me more certain that rational people need to arm themselves against irrational nuts.
At the time the constitution was written well regulated ment that everything in it was in proper working order. My father is a historian specializing on the Lewis and Clark expedition. Before leaving an armorer checked out all their weapons to make sure they were "well regulated". He pointed this out several years ago. Many want to say that the militia is only the national guard. This is a lie.
You do know that assault weapons are semi-automatic with pistol grips and some cosmetic feature (such as a muzzle guard to prevent finger burns)? I would look at the definition of assault weapon. A lot of people wrongly think that assault rifles are assault weapons. Sadly, all assault rifles and machine guns are exempted from assault weapons bans and only semi-automatic variants of assault rifles and machine guns are banned. That is why the assault weapons ban is so ass-backwards.
The state of California already has an assault weapons ban. Because of that I can not purchase a semi-automatic rifle with a pistol grip that has an adjustable stock (that makes it an assault weapon because it is a cosmetic feature). On the other hand I could legal purchase a machine gun with an adjustable stock because the assault weapons ban has nothing to do with fully automatic weapons. Gun control advocates in the US have run a great propaganda campaign tricking people into thinking that assualt weapons are assault rifles or machine guns. In reality the assault weapons ban targets varmit rifles such as the semi-automatic AR15 while ironically exempting the fully automatic version of the AR15.
Just so we are all clear:
This is an assault weapon (because of the magazine outside of the grip on a handgun):
This is an assault weapon (because of the forward pistol grip and the barrel shroud):
These are NOT assault weapons:
"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."
British General Charles Napier while in India
In light of your educational post, I ammend my comment to regard firearms that spit out more than 1 round per second per trigger pull.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
During the Clinton 'assult rifle ban" I legally bought an AK. Due to some twisted logic it would have been illegal to attach a knife to it. Go figure.
If I recall correctly even a bayonette mount makes a rifle illegal under the assault weapons ban. So yeah, have fun with the AK, but don't put a knife on it in the state of California or it could become an assault weapon.
"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."
British General Charles Napier while in India