• AWB introduced today
    131 replies, posted
Some of the comments on the article are pure gold: [QUOTE]"I got shot at Virginia Tech by a handgun with a ten round magazine. This is why I support this bill. It would have done completely nothing to stop me from being shot, but I either don't realize that or care, because someone told me there's a boogeyman responsible for having shot me. This boogeyman transformed the weapon that was used against me into a Bushmaster AR-15 machine gun with a two hundred round magazine that fired bayonet lugs out of it's barrel shroud."[/QUOTE]
It is possible to get fully automatic rifles in America, but when you find one, (Which by the way, they are very rare, and carry a price tag of $10,000+) you must fill out extensive paperwork with law enforcment and to the government. You must go through vigerous background checks and mental health screenings, ect.
[QUOTE=IliekBoxes;39342432] this post shouldnt be recieving wiiners :( [/QUOTE] Don't tell me what to do!
[QUOTE=Loen;39342835]oh no I cant have certain cosmetic features on my weapon or larger magazines that trade off compactness and light-weightedness for less frequent magazine swapping god how ever will I do my shootings against unarmed, defenseless civillians now!!!![/QUOTE] "BOB, BOB HURRY." 'WHAT?' "THE GUNS, CHECK THE GUNS! THE AWB JUST PASSED!" -runs to garage armory- -empty- 'NOOOOOO, THEY'RE ALL GONE!! DAMN YOU OBAMAAAAAAAAAAAA'
[QUOTE=UziXxX;39342877]It is possible to get fully automatic rifles in America, but when you find one, (Which by the way, they are very rare, and carry a price tag of $10,000+) you must fill out extensive paperwork with law enforcment and to the government. You must go through vigerous background checks and mental health screenings, ect.[/QUOTE] Why is it such a fucking problem to allow fully automatic weapons anyway? You could literally achieve the same result by using a fucking shoestring.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;39342790]more like LIEberals vote ronald reagan before they destroy america[/QUOTE] No.
[QUOTE=Loen;39342918]Why is it such a fucking problem to allow fully automatic weapons anyway? You could literally achieve the same result by using a fucking shoestring.[/QUOTE] Not sure. You're asking the wrong person. But it is evident that rifles are not the problem. They AWB didn't work during the 1990s and it isn't going to work now.
threads like these turn into silly circlejerks for strong gun advocates this habit needs to stop, because it doesn't feel terribly civil
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;39342790]more like LIEberals vote ronald reagan before they destroy america[/QUOTE] Reagan was more gun control than Obama has been.
[QUOTE=Ownederd;39342959]threads like these turn into silly circlejerks for strong gun advocates this habit needs to stop, because it doesn't feel terribly civil[/QUOTE] "GASP! People disagree with me! On the Internet! Not on my watch!"
[QUOTE=SPESSMEHREN;39343033]"GASP! People disagree with me! On the Internet! Not on my watch!"[/QUOTE] that's not what i'm arguing lol
[QUOTE=Ownederd;39342959]threads like these turn into silly circlejerks for strong gun advocates this habit needs to stop, because it doesn't feel terribly civil[/QUOTE] maybe there majority are anti-gun bans for a reason? God forbid someone have a differing opinions than your own.
[QUOTE=UziXxX;39342940]Not sure. You're asking the wrong person. But it is evident that rifles are not the problem. They AWB didn't work during the 1990s and it isn't going to work now.[/QUOTE] ssh, don't think too hard kid, go take your zoloft with some good fluoride water and stop asking questions, they want you more docile so you DONT ASK THESE KINDS OF QUESTIONS. [QUOTE=Ownederd;39342959]threads like these turn into silly circlejerks for strong gun advocates this habit needs to stop, because it doesn't feel terribly civil[/QUOTE] GUYS, HES RIGHT, STOP! WEVE GOTTA CATER TO THE MINORITIES NEEDS SO GUN OWNERS PLEASE STOP POSTING SO THE FEW LIBERALS HERE CAN FEEL LIKE THEY'RE ON EVEN GROUND, BE SURE TO LEAVE ONLY THE DUMBEST GUN OWNERS HERE SO IT'S EVEN. CAUSE IF WE DON'T THEN WE'RE SUDDENLY RACIST.
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;39343071]maybe there majority are anti-gun bans for a reason? God forbid someone have a differing opinions than your own.[/QUOTE] no dude i'm talking about unwarranted non-sequiturs and strawmans, then it kinda snowballs into a circlejerk [quote]GUYS, HES RIGHT, STOP! WEVE GOTTA CATER TO THE MINORITIES NEEDS SO GUN OWNERS PLEASE STOP POSTING SO THE FEW LIBERALS HERE CAN FEEL LIKE THEY'RE ON EVEN GROUND, BE SURE TO LEAVE ONLY THE DUMBEST GUN OWNERS HERE SO IT'S EVEN. CAUSE IF WE DON'T THEN WE'RE SUDDENLY RACIST.[/quote] this is what i'm talking about lmao
I wonder how we'll look at this gun cult in another couple of hundred years. I mean, justifying ownership of tools explicitly designed for murder with "it's my hobby!" and "you never know when you could use it!", especially against robber in the latter case, who are far more likely to take initiative to shoot you if they think you could shoot them first. They come for your stuff, they don't want to get insane heat on their heels by being branded as a murderer, so you might as well stick to peppersp- nope not cowboy romantic enough, gotta keep up the arms race between neighbours alive and healthy.
[QUOTE=Ownederd;39343101]no dude i'm talking about unwarranted non-sequiturs and strawmans, then it kinda snowballs into a circlejerk[/QUOTE] yeah thats how SH threads go, thats literally nothing new. Whether you're debating free speech or gun control, it will always resort to feelings and opinions. After one side of the opposition gets sick of debating feelings and leaves, the other side circle jerks till they get bored. If you want an actual debate, go to mass debate.
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;39343137]yeah thats how SH threads go, thats literally nothing new. Whether you're debating free speech or gun control, it will always resort to feelings and opinions. After one side of the opposition gets sick of debating feelings and leaves, the other side circle jerks till they get bored. If you want an actual debate, go to mass debate.[/QUOTE] "just another day in SH lol!" this is a incredibly annoying thing to say
Damn all this ruckus sure are getting gun sellers tons of money
[QUOTE=Ownederd;39343148]"just another day in SH lol!" this is a incredibly annoying thing to say[/QUOTE] Sorry but thats how it is. SH is a shit fest when it comes to debates.
I hope everything in the bill passes except the assault weapons ban and magazine size limiters, really. The rest of the bill is pretty great.
[QUOTE=SKEEA;39342555]Are you serious.[/QUOTE] Much scarier than the shoulder thing that goes up!
[QUOTE=Marik Bentusi;39343134]I wonder how we'll look at this gun cult in another couple of hundred years. I mean, justifying ownership of tools explicitly designed for murder with "it's my hobby!" and "you never know when you could use it!", especially against robber in the latter case, who are far more likely to take initiative to shoot you if they think you could shoot them first. They come for your stuff, they don't want to get insane heat on their heels by being branded as a murderer, so you might as well stick to peppersp- nope not cowboy romantic enough, gotta keep up the arms race between neighbours alive and healthy.[/QUOTE] Fireworks use gun powder and explosives like the kind used to kill. Model rockets use the same principle that propels rockets and missiles like ones used to kill. Yet these are both acceptable pass-times. Not all guns are designed to kill. Yes, they can kill and they should be considered dangerous, but so can a fire cracker blow off your hand or a model rocket cause bodily harm if used in a malicious manner. My glock has never killed anyone, and never will kill anyone.
There is a large doubt that this ban will pass, both sides can agree to this. However, there's no stopping states.
I still await for the "Sleight of hand shooter", the maniac who doesn't needs magazines with more than 10 rounds, and the "Bulletless Samurai", who stabs a bunch of people in a row with a very small switchblade. I wonder what will they ban next when those happen...
[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;39343298]I still await for the "Sleight of hand shooter", the maniac who doesn't needs magazines with more than 10 rounds, and the "Bulletless Samurai", who stabs a bunch of people in a row with a very small switchblade. I wonder what will they ban next when those happen...[/QUOTE] SoH Shooter - Eric David Harris (Columbine) used a Hi-Point Carbine with only 10-round mags. Harris shot 96 times. Seung-Hui Cho (Virginia Tech) used 10-round magazines in his Glock and Walther. Cho shot 170 times. Samurai - Guy in China who stabbed a bunch of children. I can't remember the details.
They're trying to prevent it, and I can respect that. But there's no easy way out of a situation like this without some group getting completely butthurt. The problem is, in my opinion, news channels who decide that making the shooter famous will get them more views.
They're just guns, you guys are acting as if Hitler is rising from the dead and is starting the Holocaust Part 2.
oh look who it is. Dianne "Die already" Feinstein and Carolyn "Shoulder thing that goes up" McCarthy
[QUOTE=AJisAwesome15;39343639]They're just guns, you guys are acting as if Hitler is rising from the dead and is starting the Holocaust Part 2.[/QUOTE] Don't knock it because you don't understand it.
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;39342466]I just love this part. Columbine happened during the first AWB and the Virginia Tech shooter used AWB approved magazines. That just goes to show how pointless this bill is.[/QUOTE] can I add, without getting dumbs, that after the first AWB the crime rate in America went down as fuck, I'm not saying that AWB was the cause, but conversely, it didn't hurt, so I can't say that the AWB will make anything worse.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.