I don't think I would want to use a mag that came out of a 3d printer
[QUOTE=felix the cat;39238690]If you have a 3d printer you can make them p. easy[/QUOTE]
They don't look very strong to me
[editline]16th January 2013[/editline]
Also 3d printers are really fucking expensive, though my uni has one I may be able to use
seems to work p. well
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q10Jz2qIog8[/media]
[editline]16th January 2013[/editline]
[url]http://defcad.org/ar-15-magazine-30-round-mag/[/url]
[QUOTE=kman866;39237996]I'd buy it if I hadn't just dropped 2400$ on a SCAR 17...[/QUOTE]
Ef you! I was thinking about selling my AR to pick up a SCAR-17, but the cheapest one I have found was $10,000, lol.
On the topic of gun control, an acquaintance of mine from Boston is for Gun control. His response to one of my Facebook posts was, "Freedom of speech does not kill children in schools." I ended up throwing this on him, and have yet to receive a response back...
[quote] Freedom of speech is easily capable of causing riots that can lead to deaths. In all of history, religion is the largest cause of intentional death the world has ever seen, and still is to this day. Intentional death/murder is equally bad, whether it be children or the elderly.
Regardless of what type of guns the Government bans, it will do absolutely nothing to curb violence. I repeat, it will do NOTHING. A gun is a gun, and a criminal is a criminal. It doesn't matter how many shots a gun is capable of holding, or how fast it can fire them, they are all equally capable of causing the same amount of harm. The same thing goes for a criminal, it doesn't matter to them what type of guns are banned, or how many shots it can hold/fire, they will obtain it and still cause harm. Any form of gun control is unconstitutional regulation that only effects law-abiding citizens. They want to limit magazines to 10 rounds or less. Clearly 10 dead children are better than 30. Oh wait, they can just carry two more magazines, the criminal is still capable of what he could do before. Eric Harris used a Hi-Point Carbine during the Columbine massacre. The Hi-Point Carbine was legal under the AWB, and would be legal under a new AWB. He used 10-round magazines and fired the gun 96 times. Dylan Klebold used a TEC-9 with a 52, 32, and 28 round magazine, and he fired a total of 55 times. This gun and all of the magazines he used were illegal under the AWB. The Columbine Shooting shows how an AWB does not work, from BOTH sides. Restricting guns and magazines does not prevent destruction, nor does it prevent criminals from obtaining them.
All of that aside, you missed the point of this post entirely. Whatever the government bans, will not effect me. The panic buying that has been running rampant for the past month, has not effected me. The only reason that I even post these kinds of things is because I am against the government trying to regulate the Constitution. If the 2nd amendment was meant to be regulated in any way, shape, or form, clauses would have been added to it during it's inception, but alas, they were not. The amendments were made clear during their inception. The 2nd amendment was made to prevent tyranny. Civilians then had the same style of weapons as militia/military. Yes, times change, things do become more deadly, but that does not give the government the right to control that weaponry, preventing the citizens equal rights to it (something the Constitution was meant to prevent). They banned machine guns in the 80s, weapons that were used even less in crimes than the current semi-automatic rifles they are trying to ban today are. Clinton pushed for the AWB in the 90s, and ultimately succeeded. However, Clinton himself later on said that the AWB did nothing to curb violence, and was ultimately the cause of the democrats losing control of the White House and Congress.
Let's put guns aside completely, pretend they do not exist, and pretend the 2nd amendment does not exist. Suppose a protest(s) caused a riot(s) that lead to the deaths of one or more individuals. The government steps in and says that the American people still retain their right to freedom of speech, but they have banned protesting. How do you think the American populace would react? Suppose a Catholic figurehead (this is just an example, I am Catholic myself) incites his followers to commit a murder(s) in the name of whom/whatever they worship. The government steps in and says that Catholicism is now banned in the United States. How do you think the American populace would react?[/quote]
ridge sell your AK to me
i can pick it up so you don't even have to have it shipped
Guys... We are about to get hit by some pretty extreme gun shit in the next 30 minutes... Keep an eye on the tv (or wait afterwards and read a reliable source if you don't like listening to him :v: )
[QUOTE=kman866;39241465]Guys... We are about to get hit by some pretty extreme gun shit in the next 30 minutes... Keep an eye on the tv (or wait afterwards and read a reliable source if you don't like listening to him :v: )[/QUOTE]
What happened? Australia news will take a few hours to bring it here
Can someone summarize it for us, not near a TV at the moment.
[QUOTE=download;39241550]What happened? Australia news will take a few hours to bring it here[/QUOTE]
I'm guessing he's going to begin his address to the nation regarding all this gun stuff.
11:45, he'll be on tv surrounded by children talking about his "proposals."
Of course he's surrounded by kids who will probably cry or look sad "please ban guns, do you wanna see more of us die?"
Or some bullshit like that
Using children as leverage, that's low.
It sickens me. The kids have no idea what he is talking about and aren't into politics. Their parents just said hey, go be on television, and here we are. It sickens me that he would use children to glorify his proposition, but it also bothers me greatly that he would politicize a massacre to push his political agenda further. Just sick...
But guys, I need some help with something. You guys are always great at helping out so I need some help finding something. My brother got screwed over at our LGS and long story short, couldn't get a 50 beowulf barrel. He has all the brass and bullets and such, but we can't find him a barrel anywhere. He's been working on it for a long time and I'd like to help him out and buy him a barrel. Do you guys know of anyone who would have one?
The ban is going to go through, it's inevitable. People didn't listen to me and said "there's no way it will happen" well look now.
It was only a matter of time before that jackass decides to throw his weight around.
Shit, I hope there is good news when I wake up later on.
Found one on gunbroker for you, seems everyone else is out of them
[url]http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=326110262[/url]
Oh god dammit, two more school shootings this morning. This is why we can't have nice things.
[QUOTE=kman866;39241861]Oh god dammit, two more school shootings this morning. This is why we can't have nice things.[/QUOTE]
link
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;39241842]The ban is going to go through, it's inevitable. People didn't listen to me and said "there's no way it will happen" well look now.
It was only a matter of time before that jackass decides to throw his weight around.[/QUOTE]
Fuck you! Don't talk like that! I still wanna buy my FAL or AK74 :(
Watching it on the television. Kentucky and Missouri.
There's a table with a pen and paper on a table. He's signing executive actions, it is going to happen.
I'll keep you guys updated if you aren't watching.
[QUOTE=NuclearAnnhilation;39241874]Fuck you! Don't talk like that! I still wanna buy my FAL or AK74 :([/QUOTE]
Well you're not going to. I'll never get my Garand, K98, Arisaka or any other rifle from WWII.
[QUOTE=kman866;39241885]
There's a table with a pen and paper on a table. He's signing executive actions, it is going to happen.[/QUOTE]
what do those actions entail? is it the "strengthening current laws" like more thorough backround checks and stuff, or is he signing in new ones?
[QUOTE=kman866;39241885]
There's a table with a pen and paper on a table. He's signing executive actions, it is going to happen.[/QUOTE]
He can sign all the shit he wants. It won't stop crime and he knows this.
I don't know, we'll wait and find out. I have class so I can't stay and watch the whole thing.
Biden is on tv spewing bullshit, as usual. Sounds like he's about to cry.
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;39241898]what do those actions entail? is it the "strengthening current laws" like more thorough backround checks and stuff, or is he signing in new ones?[/QUOTE]
By definition, his executive actions can only "strengthen current laws". But that may entail reviving the '94 AWB, since it still 'exists' by some factor, and was never repealed.
"Some will happen immediately, some will happen over time. We have the gun."
Obama is about to come on and talk.
Fuck it, I'm going to work and buying a Beta Mag if he does a ban.
executive order is going to help law enforcement, mental health, and other things. Hasn't said anything about an AWB or anything like it yet.
23 executive actions.
(not sure if these are executive orders, but...) He's pushing for: Universal background checks. 10 round limit for mags, ban "assault magazines." Help law enforcement, be stronger on people who buy guns for criminals.
Did he just say that the guy used an assault rifle
Seriously
he's going for an AWB.
wtf I can't panic buy with $250
You can buy a collection of barrel shrouds.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
