• Obama to ban assault weapons.
    1,785 replies, posted
[url]http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,320383,00.html[/url] [QUOTE]The top 10 guns used in crimes in the U.S. in 2000, according to an unpublished study by U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and obtained exclusively by TIME: 1. Smith and Wesson .38 revolver 2. Ruger 9 mm semiautomatic 3. Lorcin Engineering .380 semiautomatic 4. Raven Arms .25 semiautomatic 5. Mossberg 12 gauge shotgun 6. Smith and Wesson 9mm semiautomatic 7. Smith and Wesson .357 revolver 8. Bryco Arms 9mm semiautomatic 9. Bryco Arms .380 semiautomatic 10. Davis Industries .380 semiautomatic The list is derived from the center's investigations of 88,570 guns recovered from crime scenes in 46 cities in 2000, is being analyzed for ATF's youth gun crime interdiction initiative, which helps local police forces understand and counter gun trafficking to youth in their jurisdictions.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Ridge;38890287][url]http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,320383,00.html[/url][/QUOTE] Looks like S&W is a favorite amongst criminals. :v:
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;38889630]yes you're absolutely correct. if you study the history of gun control in other countries, you'll see that it works.[/QUOTE] Yeah, for encouraging people to steal them ALL the time instead of buying them legally at least sometimes. And for encouraging people to use BOMBS instead of guns.
Obama is speaking on gun violence.
Live stream [url]http://news.yahoo.com/video/abc-news-plus-special-report-220000361.html[/url] Typical political talk with buzz words such as "assault rifles, military style assault rifles, etc"
bring back insane asylums. who cares if it puts us in more debt, we're never going to pay it back anyway.
[QUOTE=MR-X;38891924]Live stream [url]http://news.yahoo.com/video/abc-news-plus-special-report-220000361.html[/url] Typical political talk with buzz words such as "assault rifles, military style assault rifles, etc"[/QUOTE] Missed a big chunk of it, any highlights?
[quote] A summary of key provisions in the updated bill: Stops the sale, transfer, importation and manufacturing of more than 100 specifically-named firearms as well as certain semiautomatic rifles, handguns and shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and semiautomatic rifles and handguns with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds. Stops the sale, transfer, importation and manufacturing of large-capacity ammunition feeding devices (magazines, strips and drums) capable of accepting more than 10 rounds. Protects legitimate hunters and the rights of existing gun owners by: grandfathering weapons legally possessed on the date of enactment; exempting more than 900 specifically-named weapons used for hunting and sporting purposes; and exempting antique, manually-operated, and permanently disabled weapons. ###[/quote] [url=http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2012/12/feinstein-to-introduce-updated-assault-weapons-bill-in-new-congress]Senate.gov[/url] 'Certain Semiautomatic Rifles' because they have polymer and kevlar!
Ban everything with a detachable magazine what lol good luck
Good luck to the whole thing in general, lmao. It'll never get passed.
The whole American "gun culture" thing is pretty bizarre and more than a little unnerving. Thank fuck it's only an American thing.
[QUOTE=PaChIrA;38888636]Uh you do realize that people can die from baseball bats, knives, and crowbars right? And that people can survive gun shot wounds even to the head? And there are other uses for guns, I own a single handgun that I use for recreational purposes. I highly doubt anyone will ever invade my home and I didn't buy it for that. I have my handgun for target shooting and because it is my favorite handgun as it is aesthetically pleasing and it fits with my interests of the cold war and video games. Just because I own a gun doesn't mean I want to use it on a living thing.[/QUOTE] That'll be a Makarov then?
[QUOTE=hypno-toad;38888998]More like MENACING looking assault weapons, you sick baby-killing bastard No doubt they'll have high capacity clips and flipping shoulder butts[/QUOTE] I'd be more intimidated by a solid wood buttstock... those things hurt more
[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;38888031]rumor has it that it'll be much stricter and that the grandfather clause will be eliminated, which would make me and millions of other Americans felons overnight[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;38892199]Protects legitimate hunters and the rights of existing gun owners by: [b]grandfathering weapons legally possessed on the date of enactment;[/b] exempting more than 900 specifically-named weapons used for hunting and sporting purposes; and exempting antique, manually-operated, and permanently disabled weapons.[/QUOTE] Rumour seems to fail you here.
Watching CNN and they have war journalist on the air talking about the horrific shit they've seen in Libya and other war torn countries. Then she said something along the lines that the weapons these people use do not need to be on the streets of America and went on about some other shit. At that point I lost my shit - I'm so tired of uneducated fucks talking out of their asses about shit they have no idea about and being called "experts." Now they're doing a story about "diving in to the mind of a killer" and comparing terrorists to mass murders/killers.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38892464]Rumour seems to fail you here.[/QUOTE] And doesn't this mean that the gun control has thus failed..? The only way to show deemable effect is 30 Years, and if it's another 10 year ban, it's not gonna do shit.
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;38892599]And doesn't this mean that the gun control has thus failed..? The only way to show deemable effect is 30 Years, and if it's another 10 year ban, it's not gonna do shit.[/QUOTE] That's not the argument. He claimed that the grandfather clause would be removed.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38892620]That's not the argument. He claimed that the grandfather clause would be removed.[/QUOTE] Eh, shit sorry. Didn't notice the first post.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38892620]That's not the argument. He claimed that the grandfather clause would be removed.[/QUOTE] Technically, he assumed it would based on rumor, but the rumors proved to be inaccurate. He wasn't exactly making an argument.
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;38889630]yes you're absolutely correct. if you study the history of gun control in other countries, you'll see that it works.[/QUOTE] nopnopnop a gun ban didn't stop some teenager from going on a stabbing spree, killing 8 and injuring 5 more in China: [url]http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/9446242/Chinese-teenager-stabs-8-people-to-death.html[/url] [editline]19th December 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;38892235]Ban everything with a detachable magazine what lol good luck[/QUOTE] They already did it here in Cali i think all semiauto rifles need a bullet button or an internal mag
I think this article summed up my opinion pretty well: [url]http://www.economist.com/blogs/lexington/2012/12/gun-control[/url] [quote]I would also say, to stick my neck out a bit further, that I find many of the arguments advanced for private gun ownership in America a bit unconvincing, and tinged with a blend of excessive self-confidence and faulty risk perception. I am willing to believe that some householders, in some cases, have defended their families from attack because they have been armed. But I also imagine that lots of ordinary adults, if woken in the night by an armed intruder, lack the skill to wake, find their weapon, keep hold of their weapon, use it correctly and avoid shooting the wrong person. And my hunch is that the model found in places like Japan or Britain—no guns in homes at all, or almost none—is on balance safer. As for the National Rifle Association bumper stickers arguing that only an armed citizenry can prevent tyranny, I wonder if that isn’t a form of narcissism, involving the belief that lone, heroic individuals will have the ability to identify tyranny as it descends, recognise it for what it is, and fight back. There is also the small matter that I don’t think America is remotely close to becoming a tyranny, and to suggest that it is is both irrational and a bit offensive to people who actually do live under tyrannical rule. Nor is it the case that the British are relaxed about being subjects of a monarch, or are less fussed about freedoms. A conservative law professor was recently quoted in the papers saying he did not want to live in a country where the police were armed and the citizens not. I fear in Britain, at least, native gun-distrust goes even deeper than that: the British don’t even like their police to be armed (though more of them are than in the past). But here is the thing. The American gun debate takes place in America, not Britain or Japan. And banning all guns is not about to happen (and good luck collecting all 300m guns currently in circulation, should such a law be passed). It would also not be democratic. I personally dislike guns. I think the private ownership of guns is a tragic mistake. But a majority of Americans disagree with me, some of them very strongly. And at a certain point, when very large majorities disagree with you, a bit of deference is in order. So in short I am not sure that tinkering with gun control will stop horrible massacres like today’s. And I am pretty sure that the sort of gun control that would work—banning all guns—is not going to happen. So I have a feeling that even a more courageous debate than has been heard for some time, with Mr Obama proposing gun-control laws that would have been unthinkable in his first term, will not change very much at all. Hence the gloom.[/quote]
[QUOTE=NoDachi;38893736]I think this article summed up my opinion pretty well: [url]http://www.economist.com/blogs/lexington/2012/12/gun-control[/url][/QUOTE] well said. At first i thought he was pro-gun control.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38892464]Rumour seems to fail you here.[/QUOTE] Doesn't make one difference because the rest of the bill is so damn horrible. Who cares that one part of the rumor was wrong when the rest of the bill is both unconstitutional and abysmal by all standards
[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;38894130]Doesn't make one difference because the rest of the bill is so damn horrible. Who cares that one part of the rumor was wrong when the rest of the bill is both unconstitutional and abysmal by all standards[/QUOTE] Because you greatly exaggerated it (and relied on rumour rather than official statements) as though Obama was going to come to your house and take your guns. I mean, being wrong about the grandfather clause alone is enough to make the AWB 90% less insane.
[QUOTE=sHiBaN;38880105]imo we don't need restrictions but proper information. isn't it alarming that in the near VERY close future we might not be allowed to own any weapons at all. makes it easier for criminals to target unarmed civilians[/QUOTE] I don't really think it makes a difference. I mean, even if you're armed, a thug can just hold his weapon to you in an alley and what are you gonna do? You can't reach for the gun then.
[QUOTE=MountainWatcher;38894234]I don't really think it makes a difference. I mean, even if you're armed, a thug can just hold his weapon to you in an alley and what are you gonna do? You can't reach for the gun then.[/QUOTE] You could if you keep it concealed next to your wallet.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38894185]Because you greatly exaggerated it (and relied on rumour rather than official statements) as though Obama was going to come to your house and take your guns. I mean, being wrong about the grandfather clause alone is enough to make the AWB 90% less insane.[/QUOTE] Its still insane, if it goes through that means new assault rifles won't be allowed to be bought and the entire gun industry will suffer as a result.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38894185]Because you greatly exaggerated it (and relied on rumour rather than official statements) as though Obama was going to come to your house and take your guns. I mean, being wrong about the grandfather clause alone is enough to make the AWB 90% less insane.[/QUOTE] you've proven a billion times that you know nothing about gun politics and you actually called gun owners all future rapists pedophiles and baby killers so you'd be best off not commenting on this situation
[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;38894323]you've proven a billion times that you know nothing about gun politics and you actually called gun owners all future rapists pedophiles and baby killers so you'd be best off not commenting on this situation[/QUOTE] "If you buy a gun for self defence you intend to kill someone." pretty much sums up how much he knows.
[QUOTE=laserguided;38894318]Its still insane, if it goes through that means new assault rifles won't be allowed to be bought and the entire gun industry will suffer as a result.[/QUOTE] The most hilarious part: They aren't even assault rifles. GG government, you're fucking retarded and your bills really show.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.