Utah begins to celebrate Gun Appreciation Day, about to make Colt 1911 state gun. - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Led Zeppelin;27701168]Fantastic choice, but I think all but the original service guns look pretty ugly. Don't ruin a good thing.[/QUOTE] How about you try this on for size then if you think it's ugly [img]http://www.1337upload.net/files/k258076_1195290707718.jpg[/img] [editline]28th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Bean-O;27701797]Sometimes I wish I lived in Utah.[/QUOTE] No you don't, It's a Mormon dictatorship [editline]28th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=mastermaul;27720105]In my state it is entirely within my legal right to walk down main street with a loaded AR-15 slung over my shoulder.[/QUOTE] As is in a Majority of States, though it's so frowned upon and rarely exercised the Police will take no time in giving you some tarmac for breakfast

[QUOTE=wewt!;27717449]I never really liked 1911's, my tiny hands prefer Sig Sauer's because I can't reach the slide lock otherwise :saddowns: I can't deny that it's a good handgun though.[/QUOTE] It is a slide lock, not a slide release. (Which you said, I'm simply emphasizing.) You release the slide on a 1911 with your left hand by pulling the slide. Using the slide lock to release the slide on a 1911 will cause minor wear.

[QUOTE=Broseph_;27721812]As is in a Majority of States, though it's so frowned upon and rarely exercised the Police will take no time in giving you some tarmac for breakfast[/QUOTE] I could sue the city seeing as how I wouldn't be breaking law fucking one unless I was in a park or something obvious.

[QUOTE=Mindtwistah;27711296]Why do so many of you Americans appreciate guns so much? What's with the love for the #1 tool of killing? Countries where guns are restricted by the government have much lower gun crime rates per capita than the US. Don't think that because everyone carries guns everyone is safe. It's the other way around. I'm not saying you should start restricting gun-trade and possession. It's too late for that, there are already millions in circulation, to remove them all at once would be impossible and would only create an imbalance, and since you got Mexico so close-by without a proper border control criminals could just get the guns from there. But there is still no reason to love these killing machines like so many of you seem to do.[/QUOTE] There are millions of responsible gun owners and yet only a tiny fraction of them use guns in crime. Restricting firearms would be pointless because that would never stop criminals. Restricting firearms would just keep them out of the hands of good citizens. Meanwhile, criminals get their hands on them via the black market. Gun owners aren't paranoid. Governments that restrict firearms are paranoid. BTW, look at Switzerland. Nearly everyone over there has a gun, yet they have very low violent crime rates.

Hate to turn this into a gun argument (looks like it has already) but America has high gun crime because of the gun culture. There's 270 mil guns in the US. You cant just restrict ownership like you can in a European country and expect the crime rate to go down. All these gun control idiots think laws are equally effective in any country. I mean it's like trying to ban weed in jamaica (they did). How well has that worked out? And in any other country for that matter?

It's a pretty cool idea. Is fitting that John Browning came from that state aswell.

[QUOTE=Pace.;27723041]Hate to turn this into a gun argument (looks like it has already) but America has high gun crime because of the gun culture. There's 270 mil guns in the US. You cant just restrict ownership like you can in a European country and expect the crime rate to go down. All these gun control idiots think laws are equally effective in any country. I mean it's like trying to ban weed in jamaica (they did). How well has that worked out? And in any other country for that matter?[/QUOTE] No, America has high gun crime because it has social issues coming out of it's ears. If you were to magically eliminate all guns in the US, knife crime would sky-rocket, and if you banned those, people would be running each other down and jamming screwdrivers in people's necks like there was no tomorrow.

[QUOTE=Pace.;27723041]Hate to turn this into a gun argument (looks like it has already) but America has high gun crime because of the gun culture. There's 270 mil guns in the US. You cant just restrict ownership like you can in a European country and expect the crime rate to go down. All these gun control idiots think laws are equally effective in any country. I mean it's like trying to ban weed in jamaica (they did). How well has that worked out? And in any other country for that matter?[/QUOTE] America has a high crime rate because of high poverty and a worthless education system. Among other things.

[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;27715892]Lets cerebrate something designed to kill people. Why not. Where's nuclear and biochemical WMDs appreciation day, tho? [editline]28th January 2011[/editline] Or IEDs, these need love too![/QUOTE] i think there really needs to be a difference between accepting whether or not something should be a part of society (ie guns) and attaching an undue significance to that something. If someone thinks handguns are important part of a functioning society, more power to them, but they should not glaze over the fact that a handgun is essentially a tool for ending a human life, and even if it's use is justified (as in self defense) it should be treated as a sort of sad necessity instead of glorifying and celebrating it.

[QUOTE=mastermaul;27724046]America has a high crime rate because of high poverty and a worthless education system. Among other things.[/QUOTE] I'm an american and i agree with this statement.

[QUOTE=Mabus;27715081]100 years and still in service in some parts of the world, just shows how much a revolutionary handgun it was.[/QUOTE] well actually the Browning High Power was the revolutionary gun, but same inventor so w/e.

Such a sexy gun.

[QUOTE=Sigma-Lambda;27725535]i think there really needs to be a difference between accepting whether or not something should be a part of society (ie guns) and attaching an undue significance to that something. If someone thinks handguns are important part of a functioning society, more power to them, but they should not glaze over the fact that a handgun is essentially a tool for ending a human life, and even if it's use is justified (as in self defense) it should be treated as a sort of sad necessity instead of glorifying and celebrating it.[/QUOTE] This is what I am saying. Weapons are unfortunately necessary, but they are physical representation of what's wrong with people. In ideal society (which doesn't, and possibly never will exist), there would be no need for guns ever. Why CELEBRATE our weaknesses? Yes, we can't ban guns, that wouldn't help anything, but at least don't fucking circlejerk over them. No matter how you paint it, they are tools meant to end life. Life which shouldn't be denied from anybody. [editline]29th January 2011[/editline] And seriously, I would be myself more inclined to celebrate for example nuclear warheads. Nuclear warhead is a marvel of technology. It can have powers challenging the very forces of nature. Each warhead can unleash preposterous amounts of energy during fraction of second. I also dare to say nuclear weapons did MUCH more good than guns ever did. Hell, nuclear weapons are basically what made cold war cold. Neither USA or USSR could attack each other, as it would basically mean destroying themselves in the process. Nuclear weapons basically make conventional conflict between the developed nations unthinkable. This is a huge boon. The only time nuclear weapons were used, they ended a war which could have dragged for years. Yes, civilians died, but it was fraction of the number which would probably die if the war stayed conventional, considering the nationalism and will to sacrifice of people in Japan at the time.

We're human, and we have many, many flaws. Instead of donating money to starving African children, I'd rather buy a new vidya game. Is this bad? Of course. It's also very, very human. Nuclear weapons also deserve to be celebrated. Unless you live in SK, Pakistan or India.

[QUOTE=Bean-O;27701797]Sometimes I wish I lived in Utah.[/QUOTE] Become Mormon.

It might be human but also not something to glorify. It's something we should try to change. I know it's hard and will take generations, if possible at all, but we can start with not glorifying murder.

Pennsylvania almost had a State Gun once. The [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_rifle]Pennsylvania Long Rifle[/url].

[QUOTE=mastermaul;27722853]I could sue the city seeing as how I wouldn't be breaking law fucking one unless I was in a park or something obvious.[/QUOTE] The Police usually have some bullshit immunity around them and the fact it's a uphill fight Though if you are lucky, your State Police aren't as retarded as the local police

[QUOTE=AlienFanatic;27719042]i bet most of you havent even fired a gun trust me, it is much louder than in media but the feeling of knowing that you just killed something and are going to eat it in several hours is exhiliarating[/QUOTE] I don't like eating paper targets

[QUOTE=Mindtwistah;27711296]Why do so many of you Americans appreciate guns so much? What's with the love for the #1 tool of killing?[/QUOTE] Cars kill more people than guns every day.

[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;27720752][/QUOTE] Thank you for clarifying.

Colorado has MAGPUL :smug: Magpul day.

[QUOTE=Ridge;27732036]Cars kill more people than guns every day.[/QUOTE] The purpose of a car is not to kill. The qualification you need to make isn't whether or not something can be used to kill, it's whether the item in question has legitimate uses outside killing. Bombs in the hands of individuals (and not, say, demolitions teams) can, more or less, only be used for illegal purposes (killing or destruction of property), so bombs are generally illegal for a private citizen to own. Knives can be used to kill, but they can also be used to prepare and eat food, carve, cut cord and twine, and a host of other legal applications, so they are not illegal. If you want to argue that handguns should be legal, that's fine, make your case. But use a better argument than "cars kill more people" because that argument completely misses the point.

[QUOTE=Sigma-Lambda;27738677]The purpose of a car is not to kill.[/QUOTE] Incorrect [img]http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/jalopnik/2009/05/NPOCPDeathraceMain.jpg[/img] [QUOTE=Sigma-Lambda;27738677]Bombs in the hands of individuals (and not, say, demolitions teams) can, more or less, only be used for illegal purposes (killing or destruction of property), so bombs are generally illegal for a private citizen to own.[/quote] That is nit picking. Are not demolition teams made up of individuals? And I happen to have a bottle of Tannerite sitting next to me, which is a bomb material I can order online and have shipped right to my door. [quote]Knives can be used to kill, but they can also be used to prepare and eat food, carve, cut cord and twine, and a host of other legal applications, so they are not illegal.[/quote] Guns are also used to hunt. And that is a legal application as well. [quote]If you want to argue that handguns should be legal, that's fine, make your case. But use a better argument than "cars kill more people" because that argument completely misses the point.[/QUOTE] Can't say on a global level, but the US Constitution was written specifically for people with long guns to be able to stand up and fight against a government. No mention of hunting.

[QUOTE=Ridge;27739680] That is nit picking. Are not demolition teams made up of individuals?[/QUOTE] Who are licensed and recognized as a business. [QUOTE=Ridge;27739680]And I happen to have a bottle of Tannerite sitting next to me, which is a bomb material I can order online and have shipped right to my door.[/QUOTE] That's a material, not a premade bomb. [QUOTE=Ridge;27739680]Guns are also used to hunt. And that is a legal application as well.[/QUOTE] That's not the purpose of handguns. I specifically said "handguns" [QUOTE=Ridge;27739680]Can't say on a global level, but the US Constitution was written specifically for people with long guns to be able to stand up and fight against a government. No mention of hunting.[/QUOTE] It was written to allow the organization of Militias. It uses the qualifier "a well regulated militia[I][/I], being necessary to the security of a free State". That has a bunch of different interpretations that can be seen. [b]but that is beside the point[/b] because the point of my post was that "cars kill people too" is a bad argument to use and I was talking about handguns regardless. [editline]29th January 2011[/editline] also when you refused to believe that the republicans were trying to redefine rape in that other thread and you were faced with credible sources you stopped posting instead of admitting you were wrong

I seriously hate living in Utah..... BUT AT LEAST OUR FUCKING STATE GUN IS THE COLT 1911

slc is so totally devoid of any personality or culture. it's like a town designed by a marketing firm trying to appeal to the broadest possible base

[QUOTE=Sigma-Lambda;27743342]It was written to allow the organization of Militias..[/QUOTE] It's been ruled otherwise. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller[/url] [editline]29th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Sigma-Lambda;27738677]The purpose of a car is not to kill.[/QUOTE] The guy he quoted called "guns the #1 killer of people", and that's what the post was directed towards.

i need to read more [editline]29th January 2011[/editline] i still stand by my point of not celebrating guns though, that being a separate issue

[QUOTE=Sigma-Lambda;27744079]slc is so totally devoid of any personality or culture. it's like a town designed by a marketing firm trying to appeal to the broadest possible base[/QUOTE] Can't find really anything to do there except go to mall and maybe see a movie. Maybe go to the greywhale, see if they got some good rare ps2 games and maybe some music. FUCK UTAH SUCKS.