• Obama is coming after our guns
    16 replies, posted
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2h1QNTQDnoU[/media] he may have some points here
Alex Jones? Oh no... the worst think to ever happen to conspiracy theorists.
i just find it interesting that after [B]how many shootings?[/B] this is the one obama decides to hold vigils over. did we not learn from that amish school shooting in 2010, how about school shootings in 2011, or arora colarado? na he waited till his second term was secured to even suggest to put the 1994 assault weapon's ban back on the table, which is his fault. it worked for 10 years, why the hell was it not extended? just put it back into effect
[QUOTE=Sableye;38901805]i just find it interesting that after [B]how many shootings?[/B] this is the one obama decides to hold vigils over. did we not learn from that amish school shooting in 2010, how about school shootings in 2011, or arora colarado? na he waited till his second term was secured to even suggest to put the 1994 assault weapon's ban back on the table, which is his fault. it worked for 10 years, why the hell was it not extended? just put it back into effect[/QUOTE] Because the AWB didn't do anything the last time.
This guys fucking crazy, but he has one good point; It is really off beat to see the president crying about the shooting when he pretty much signs orders that have inadvertently killed 150 kids without an ounce of regret or emotion shown regarding that situation.
[QUOTE=Sableye;38901805]i just find it interesting that after [B]how many shootings?[/B] this is the one obama decides to hold vigils over. did we not learn from that amish school shooting in 2010, how about school shootings in 2011, or arora colarado? na he waited till his second term was secured to even suggest to put the 1994 assault weapon's ban back on the table, which is his fault. it worked for 10 years, why the hell was it not extended? just put it back into effect[/QUOTE] Well number one, this shooting was more deadly than both Aurora and the Amish school shooting combined and most were kindergarteners. Number two, how was the assault weapon ban effective, how did it work? Gun violence didn't decrease and most shootings are not done with assault weapons! The shootings at Sandy Hook were done entirely with semi automatic pistols.
Hey, Obama's been lax on gun control. He actually LOWERED gun control. So can we stop getting off this idea that Obama's going to raid our houses and steal our guns, and realize Alex Jones is simply insane?
[QUOTE=seroyal223;38901726][media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2h1QNTQDnoU[/media] he may have some points here[/QUOTE] I dont know though. I could believe the President was crying. He does have children of his own. [editline]19th December 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Zally13;38901933]Hey, Obama's been lax on gun control. He actually LOWERED gun control. So can we stop getting off this idea that Obama's going to raid our houses and steal our guns, and realize Alex Jones is simply insane?[/QUOTE] Eh, its not like he is out to take our guns at all but... [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20776784[/url]
[QUOTE=MadPro119;38901939]Eh, its not like he is out to take our guns at all but... [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20776784[/url][/QUOTE] Assault weapons are completely different from semi-autos. Who needs a fully-automatic gun unless you're in a war zone? You're sure as hell not hunting with one unless you want swiss deer.
[QUOTE=BlueFlash;38901974]Assault weapons are completely different from semi-autos. Who needs a fully-automatic gun unless you're in a war zone? You're sure as hell not hunting with one unless you want swiss deer.[/QUOTE] Yet simple aesthetic features can warrant a weapon to be an "Assault weapon" and they do not have to be fully automatic. Besides fully automatic weapons can be collected or shot for entertainment. Also, some studies of the ban show and increase in violence. ([url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban[/url])
[QUOTE=BlueFlash;38901974]Assault weapons are completely different from semi-autos. Who needs a fully-automatic gun unless you're in a war zone? You're sure as hell not hunting with one unless you want swiss deer.[/QUOTE] No, you're thinking of "assault rifles," which are "select-fire capable rifles chambered for an intermediate cartridge."
[QUOTE=BlueFlash;38901974]Assault weapons are completely different from semi-autos.[/QUOTE] Except they're not, and the fact that you you have completely wrong perceptions of exactly what an "assault weapon" is betrays incredible ignorance on your part. 'Assault weapon' is an arbitrary definition made up in the 90s as a scary term to help sell the idea of an AWB to the public. Actual machine guns were not covered by the AWB [I]at all[/I], (they were covered by the NFA) it only affected semi-automatic weapons with "scary" features such as bayonet lugs and pistol grips. I hate to be the one to use a car analogy here, but it's the equivalent of banning a car with a spoiler and racing tires because it 'looks fast' while having the base model be perfectly legal.
[QUOTE=BlueFlash;38901974]Assault weapons are completely different from semi-autos. Who needs a fully-automatic gun unless you're in a war zone? You're sure as hell not hunting with one unless you want swiss deer.[/QUOTE] Fully automatic weaopns have been illegal since 198(6) [editline]19th December 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=BlueFlash;38901974]Assault weapons are completely different from semi-autos. Who needs a fully-automatic gun unless you're in a war zone? You're sure as hell not hunting with one unless you want swiss deer.[/QUOTE] Fully automatic weapons have been illegal since 198(6). Your lackluster knowledge is how these bans even get brought up
[QUOTE=IliekBoxes;38902197]Fully automatic weaopns have been illegal since 198(6)[/QUOTE] No they aren't. The registry has been closed since 1986 (meaning new production select fire weapons cannot be made available to the general public), but pre-86 registered "Machine Guns" can be purchased by any citizen who is legally able to buy firearms in most areas with a $200 NFA tax stamp paid to the ATF. Legal select fire weapons just are not used in crimes because of their high cost, difficulty to acquire, and nonavailability to past criminals. They're pretty much something reserved only for the rich, who have no reason to commit personal violent crime.
[QUOTE=Sableye;38901805]i just find it interesting that after [B]how many shootings?[/B] this is the one obama decides to hold vigils over. did we not learn from that amish school shooting in 2010, how about school shootings in 2011, or arora colarado? na he waited till his second term was secured to even suggest to put the 1994 assault weapon's ban back on the table, which is his fault. it worked for 10 years, why the hell was it not extended? just put it back into effect[/QUOTE] You could say the same thing no matter when he takes his stance. If it happened after arora Colorado "why didn't he take a stance in 2011", if he took it after the Amish shootings "why didn't he say this after so and so". It goes on and on
in fact I agree with the guy.
he makes some good points. too bad they are buried under layers and layers of crazy.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.