continued: gun control/2nd ammendment

[Ace$nyper]

Originally Posted by Cbass

I don't care what kind of hunting you do, there is no need for a semi/fully auto rifle with chopped stock and high magazine capacity. If you can't make do with a 5 round magazine of .308 and a bolt, you're not competent enough with a rifle to use one. I don't hunt, but I can iron sight with a good rifle at 100 meters, given a good day without a lot of wind.

The personal protection issue goes back to what I was saying in another thread. You guys are so paranoid and fearful that you think you need guns to protect yourselves. So much for "badass" americans. This from the birthplace of political correctness. You decry "wishywashy liberals", but they cry about needing a gun to protect themselves against imaginary assailants.

Carry my enfield all day I wish I had a nice light stock she weighs in at over 12lbs bitch to carry all the time with pack etc. i'd love a plastic foldable AK styled rifle for that.

I can't for the life of me find clips for some of my rarer firearms, and am "lazy" if I can load 30 at a time 3 clips there 1 trip to the range covered. My m-1 carbine has better balance with her 30 rounder then 10. I mainly use bolt rifles but semis are cool in their own way I collect and would like authentic parts to go along eg drum mags

I live in an upper class suburbs worried, no but do I want to be ready just incase, yes. What prey tell is wrong with that?

[ct91rs]

Originally Posted by Franko914

If you are going to set limits on gun ownership for personal protection only, who is going to decide what is sufficient, and for what situation?

Those people who introduce bills, and pass laws...what do we call them again, and who elects them?

Originally Posted by Franko914

"Assault rifles" are excellent for off-hand brush hunting. What we do with our guns is our business as long as it isn't illegal. Pass laws to ban ownership of any one gun and our own business now becomes illegal

If you need an assult rifle to hunt with perhaps you should try some target practice. I go hunting regularly; anyone who defends owning assult rifles on the basis that they are a good hunting tool, is a bit out of their element.

Originally Posted by Franko914

Pass laws to ban ownership of any one gun and our own business now becomes illegal

ya,ya,ya, pass one gun law, and soon they will all be banned. That argument simply has no merit.

The federal law that bars a felon from possessing a gun has been around since '68, so it must be illegal to own a gun now, 'eh?

[Cbass]

Originally Posted by Ace$nyper

Carry my enfield all day I wish I had a nice light stock she weighs in at over 12lbs bitch to carry all the time with pack etc. i'd love a plastic foldable AK styled rifle for that.

Get a lighter rifle. I suggest the Remington 710, excellent rifle for a very good price. I think it retails for about $350, in your choice of most common hunting rounds, comes with a pretty good entry level scope too. Nice and light, excellent action and easy to maintain, comes with a 4 round clip.

Originally Posted by Ace$nyper

I can't for the life of me find clips for some of my rarer firearms, and am "lazy" if I can load 30 at a time 3 clips there 1 trip to the range covered. My m-1 carbine has better balance with her 30 rounder then 10. I mainly use bolt rifles but semis are cool in their own way I collect and would like authentic parts to go along eg drum mags

I find it absolutely absurd how people will argue until they are blue in the face about protecting their families, passing anti-terrorism legislation etc, but the moment that something that conflicts with another of their ideologies comes up, like making sure that the crazy kid at school has to reload before shooting another 10 people, and suddenly they're not so concerned.

I know it can be a bit of a PITA to have to reload all the time, but isn't it also a bit of a PITA to go through airport security and have your carry on scanned, etc?

Originally Posted by Ace$nyper

I live in an upper class suburbs worried, no but do I want to be ready just incase, yes. What prey tell is wrong with that?

I would never use a gun to try to confront someone in my own home. Assuming I get the drop on them and manage to plug them first, which is a big assumption, and assuming it is an actual intruder breaking into my home with nefarious intentions, and not my roommate getting home from a party drunk, it opens a big legal can of worms. What if the guy in question didn't have a weapon? I'm now looking at possible murder charges. What if he fires back? Houses are made of drywall and 2x4's inside, and it's very easy for a bullet to pass through a wall and wound a family member, etc.

A sword is a much more effective weapon at close range in a poorly lit room.

[tenguzero]

A sword is a much more effective weapon at close range in a poorly lit room.

Now you're talking

I have no desire to own a gun, but you had better believe I have a Katana or two in my apartment.

[Ace$nyper]

Originally Posted by Cbass

Get a lighter rifle. I suggest the Remington 710, excellent rifle for a very good price. I think it retails for about $350, in your choice of most common hunting rounds, comes with a pretty good entry level scope too. Nice and light, excellent action and easy to maintain, comes with a 4 round clip.



I find it absolutely absurd how people will argue until they are blue in the face about protecting their families, passing anti-terrorism legislation etc, but the moment that something that conflicts with another of their ideologies comes up, like making sure that the crazy kid at school has to reload before shooting another 10 people, and suddenly they're not so concerned.

I know it can be a bit of a PITA to have to reload all the time, but isn't it also a bit of a PITA to go through airport security and have your carry on scanned, etc?

I would never use a gun to try to confront someone in my own home. Assuming I get the drop on them and manage to plug them first, which is a big assumption, and assuming it is an actual intruder breaking into my home with nefarious intentions, and not my roommate getting home from a party drunk, it opens a big legal can of worms. What if the guy in question didn't have a weapon? I'm now looking at possible murder charges. What if he fires back? Houses are made of drywall and 2x4's inside, and it's very easy for a bullet to pass through a wall and wound a family member, etc.

A sword is a much more effective weapon at close range in a poorly lit room.

I like shooting my old cannons I can hit way better then with my mk2 7MM rem mag *tires me out too alot of uumph* but yea I can get somthing else but I like my old history. Why sport shoot with less fun shooting rifles?

Honestly I see your point about it being a just pita. I feel less safe now with all the scanning etc I'm not sure what airports you've been to but geez I'm scared to let these people come near me let alone dig in my boxers and toothbrush maybe just my local airport. If holding a 12+1 cap for a pistol makes me feel better compared to a 10+1 let me have it the cops get it the armed forces gets it I never saw mag caps to be too big a deal myself. I do understand why people get up "in arms" *sorry I hadda* about the subject.

In pa if you shoot someone defending yourself you damn better kill them if your in the right and they live they still can sue you for medical bills if that happened i'd probbly off him in front of the judge. Thats a whole differnt argument though. I have a sword but less contact = better I dont want his blood on me. If I may be so bold to say if reason, logic and threats don't work to first defuse a intruder and you have to defend your self, I asume they are drugged out and quite probbly have a STD or somthing along those lines. I fenced for a few years and i'm sure my saber would be fatal on the first strike but still if I can stay more then 8 feet away from someone who I have no other option other then to defend my self I dont want to risk him contacting me.

PS, I'd like to say I enjoy this debate I hope nothing I say you take as an insult its rare to see a polite disagreement.

[YogsVR4]

Originally Posted by Cbass

A sword is a much more effective weapon at close range in a poorly lit room.

12 gauge with bucksot. Very effective.

[carrrnuttt]

Originally Posted by YogsVR4

12 gauge with bucksot. Very effective.

Very cumbersome in close situations, unless you have a sawed-off, or an assault version with the pistol grip. I prefer the good 'ol MP5's myself, and if given a choice, a P-90 - excellent grip, minimal recoil (to stay on target), and can be shot from the hip with ease and, most of all, accuracy.


I have VERY good gun control.

[PBking82]

Alright there's been some very good points made in this thread except for one. What about fully-automatics? I was at a gun-shop in florida (ft. lauderdale to be specific) and they had many fully automatic firearms for sale. My friend was looking at an MP5 and said he'd buy it if he had the money, I was like yea and a Class 3 firearms license, and the owner of the shop overheard me and said "in florida you don't need a class 3 to own a fully auto." I was like WTF is up with that? seriously who is going hunting with an automatic??? I understand they are somewhat fun to shoot(as I have shot them before) but there is no way average joe blow should be allowed to but them!! I enjoy shooting guns for target practice, and don't really care about hunting(I somewhat enjoy it, because I like fresh meat but the part about sitting in the woods for 8 hours gets to me) so rifles, pistols are fine but seriously automatics? Lets get our heads out of our asses here people. Peace-

[Ace$nyper]

Originally Posted by PBking82

Alright there's been some very good points made in this thread except for one. What about fully-automatics? I was at a gun-shop in florida (ft. lauderdale to be specific) and they had many fully automatic firearms for sale. My friend was looking at an MP5 and said he'd buy it if he had the money, I was like yea and a Class 3 firearms license, and the owner of the shop overheard me and said "in florida you don't need a class 3 to own a fully auto." I was like WTF is up with that? seriously who is going hunting with an automatic??? I understand they are somewhat fun to shoot(as I have shot them before) but there is no way average joe blow should be allowed to but them!! I enjoy shooting guns for target practice, and don't really care about hunting(I somewhat enjoy it, because I like fresh meat but the part about sitting in the woods for 8 hours gets to me) so rifles, pistols are fine but seriously automatics? Lets get our heads out of our asses here people. Peace-

Why not? I see no reason you put to support your point of view in your post?

You even said autos are fun to shoot. I do think of shelling out for a class 3 but the amount of money is just insane that and the cost of the firearms.

I'm not realy a hunter either and wouldn't hunt with even a semi its bolt or nothing I belive when hunting or any kind of real presise target shooting.

I think a mp5k would make a great EDC gun small enough to hide under a jacket light very easy to aim and shoot has semi feature also.

[Cbass]

You're right, it is rather civilized in here suddenly. This worries me, better stir things up a bit.

A 30 round clip for a rifle is just plain excessive. You do not need 30 rounds, unless you are in a serious combat situation, and that's for the armed forces and police task forces.

I'll take a sword over a shotgun in a home defence situation any day of the week. Buckshot goes through walls, and I don't live alone. There is much less chance of someone getting a sword away from me, should I miss.

[Muscletang]

A Class 3 is only need to sell full autos. Only a Class 2 is needed to buy them.

Originally Posted by Cbass

A 30 round clip for a rifle is just plain excessive. You do not need 30 rounds, unless you are in a serious combat situation, and that's for the armed forces and police task forces.

I'll take a sword over a shotgun in a home defence situation any day of the week. Buckshot goes through walls, and I don't live alone. There is much less chance of someone getting a sword away from me, should I miss.

Who cares about excessive? If I want to shoot 30 rounds in a pumkin the night after Halloween I think I should be able to. The hell with this "10 round mag crap" give me the good stuff.

As for the sword argument, please. A sawed off shotgun with a #2 shot will spread out enough to knock anybody on their ass in the room without going through the walls. A sword you have to get up close and personal with the guy.

As for taking a gun away rather than a sword, are you kidding? If a guy charges you, you may be able to get 2-3 shots off. That's 1-2 shots more than needed. You miss with a sword, you're in trouble because the guy is already there.

[fredjacksonsan]

Originally Posted by Muscletang

A Class 3 is only need to sell full autos. Only a Class 2 is needed to buy them.



Who cares about excessive? If I want to shoot 30 rounds in a pumkin the night after Halloween I think I should be able to. The hell with this "10 round mag crap" give me the good stuff.

As for the sword argument, you must be a pretty lousy shot to trust a sword over a shotgun.

Bad shot? Re-read his post, he said he didn't want to hit others through the wall.

But on the other hand...."gun control is hitting what you're aiming at".


There will always be a "Need vs Want" in the realm of firearms. (As in everything else). You really don't NEED a 30 round magazine, unless you're in combat, or have a 1000 pound (455 kilo) bear charging you, or need to spray a pumpkin after Halloween You just WANT 30 rounds, so you can spray said punkin, or so you don't have to reload as much at the range, or so you can blaze away for practice vs said bear (or pumpkin).

But, the thing here (agian) is that if you're a responsible gun owner, you should be able to have what you would like (aka want) for your guns.

[tenguzero]

BAH! Any asshat can point an automatic rifle at something, pull the trigger, and make it dead. A sword takes some skill though. And even more skill on the part of the aggressor to possibly wrestle it out of your hands (as I believe Cbass was noting.)

Hunting may be important in terms of animal population control, but it could also be said that we wouldn't HAVE population issues if we weren't continually encroaching into the wild in the thoroughly abrasive way that we do. Deer and other game animals adapt much easier to living amongst people than the natural predators that feed on them -- therefore, the natural predators disappear, while the prey continues to multiply. And what happens when the predators do happen to pop up in residential neighborhoods and whatnot? People get all up in arms about it, and grab their guns to start shooting the animals, like it's the wildlife's fault that the Spring Hill development community moved in and paved over their dens.

Guns r teh gay. But, until otherwise decided, the constitution allows them. And (as I've already said) I don't know that banning them would help anyways. The problem isn't due to guns, it's due to the society with access to the guns. It's a sad cycle that's little more than "I need a gun so I can shoot him because otherwise he'll use his gun to shoot me." And this is the essence of the thing. None of you should need to own guns, because none of the criminals should be able to have them either -- it's just a tool that brings out the lowest of human values. "Look at me! I have a shiny thing that goes BANG BANG and makes me feel like a big person when I'm holding it!" It's the childhood toy that grows right along with you, from sticks and fingers, to squirtguns and pop guns, to BB guns and paintball guns, to the gunpowder family. Ideally we should be able to exist alongside these things in a state of (relative) safety. But this isn't an ideal world, and "from my cold, dead hands" is a sentiment shared by both law-abiding gun owners, and criminals.

[Ace$nyper]

Originally Posted by tenguzero

BAH! Any asshat can point an automatic rifle at something, pull the trigger, and make it dead. A sword takes some skill though. And even more skill on the part of the aggressor to possibly wrestle it out of your hands (as I believe Cbass was noting.)

Hunting may be important in terms of animal population control, but it could also be said that we wouldn't HAVE population issues if we weren't continually encroaching into the wild in the thoroughly abrasive way that we do. Deer and other game animals adapt much easier to living amongst people than the natural predators that feed on them -- therefore, the natural predators disappear, while the prey continues to multiply. And what happens when the predators do happen to pop up in residential neighborhoods and whatnot? People get all up in arms about it, and grab their guns to start shooting the animals, like it's the wildlife's fault that the Spring Hill development community moved in and paved over their dens.

Guns r teh gay. But, until otherwise decided, the constitution allows them. And (as I've already said) I don't know that banning them would help anyways. The problem isn't due to guns, it's due to the society with access to the guns. It's a sad cycle that's little more than "I need a gun so I can shoot him because otherwise he'll use his gun to shoot me." And this is the essence of the thing. None of you should need to own guns, because none of the criminals should be able to have them either -- it's just a tool that brings out the lowest of human values. "Look at me! I have a shiny thing that goes BANG BANG and makes me feel like a big person when I'm holding it!" It's the childhood toy that grows right along with you, from sticks and fingers, to squirtguns and pop guns, to BB guns and paintball guns, to the gunpowder family. Ideally we should be able to exist alongside these things in a state of (relative) safety. But this isn't an ideal world, and "from my cold, dead hands" is a sentiment shared by both law-abiding gun owners, and criminals.

In your last paragraph I think you over anazlie it but do make a very strong point. If we somehow could magicly remove all firearms people would still hold you up just at knife point etc.

A firearm is a tool and like any other it can be misused. Taking away them from crimals is the key. I do think stronger punishments for crimals using guns or those who try to get them would be a good thing.

As for the need vs want. I think it comes down to crooks will get things no matter. The school shootings and LA bank shooting happened when 10 rounds was the max on a clip both had 30 rounders and up. But the cops and public didn't. Joe crack head will have an uzi no matter what.

I agree its harder to take a sword away but as I stated I fear HIV hep etc if someone who is confronted with you preparing to defend your self
still attacks is out of his mind I would like to keep him 10+ feet away.

[Cbass]

Originally Posted by Muscletang

Who cares about excessive? If I want to shoot 30 rounds in a pumkin the night after Halloween I think I should be able to. The hell with this "10 round mag crap" give me the good stuff.

That's the attitude! Everyone should have as much magazine capacity as they want when they snap and decide to start offing people in the park, because you don't feel like reloading!

Originally Posted by Muscletang

As for the sword argument, please. A sawed off shotgun with a #2 shot will spread out enough to knock anybody on their ass in the room without going through the walls. A sword you have to get up close and personal with the guy.

Point one, isn't a sawed off shotgun illegal?

Point two, this goes back to my point of Americans being afraid to get up close and personal these days. Hell, I'll use my bare hands if I have to.

Originally Posted by Muscletang

As for taking a gun away rather than a sword, are you kidding? If a guy charges you, you may be able to get 2-3 shots off. That's 1-2 shots more than needed. You miss with a sword, you're in trouble because the guy is already there.

Try this sometime. Get a buddy with a paintball gun, and play a little game. Try to shoot him with that paintball gun when he doesn't want to be shot and is close to you. It can be pretty hard to hit someone in close quarters, especially if they're wielding something with reach, like a machete or a 36" katana. I mean really try it. You'd be very surprised how much time it takes to see and react to something. I think I got shot about 2 times out of 10.

Here in western Canada, most of the industry work goes on up north, in the bush. There are bears, lots of them. You know what we carry when working in the bush? A big fucking revolver, heavy caliber such as a .44 or a .454, my Taurus Raging Bull .454 is on order right now(has to be shipped from the states). Ammo is very expensive for this handcannon, so it's not a hunting or plinking piece. It's a personal defence weapon, massive stopping power and easy to wield when caught off guard. I have ordered this because there is a very real threat of running into a grizzly up who considers me to be a threat, on his/her territory, or lunch. Now a black bear I can wrestle, but a hungry grizzly can get the better of you, and you really don't want to take chances. As such, I've never had to shoot a bear before, but then again I'm used to 150-300lb not especially aggressive black bears here on Vancouver Island. If you put up a good fight, they'll usually back right down and leave.

Gun control really can work. Canada has this system where you need to have a license to buy firearms or ammunition. It's no big deal, you write a simple written test that any shooting enthusiast could ace, and you get your license. You're also supposed to register your firearms, so the government has a basis for stastics to work with. Now the NRA would flip and shit their pants if this was introduced in the US, but you know what? If a cop catches a guy with a gun, he can demand to see his license, toss him in jail and charge him, if he doesn't have one. This gives the cops the power to go after criminals. This gives the cops leverage to get little scummy punks to roll over on other criminals, and get something DONE about crime, especially violent crime.