Obama calls for assault weapons ban, background checks. - Polidicks

[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;39242788]Ok this is silly. Look at the details here, each individual legislative goal of his is separate from each other. Many of which should be helpful and can pass with bipartisan approval, the only thing that will be disputed is the awb and the hi-cap ban. They're most likely dead on arrival in the House, but other than that he's got a great plan here.[/QUOTE] I agree, I just hope the AWB and high cap mag bill(s) don't go anywhere.

[QUOTE=Ponder;39242797]You STOP with that LOGIC and REASON[/QUOTE] I have yet to see anyone anti-gun use statistics to back up their argument.

[QUOTE=Protocol7;39242815]I have yet to see anyone anti-gun use statistics to back up their argument.[/QUOTE] this is the problem with these threads..it's mostly all opinion

[QUOTE=scout1;39242708]Remember kids any attempt at progressive governance is the government trying to steal your rights Also no mention of WHO is this supposed evil mastermind, but I see a "they" in there. Ignoring the fact that the US is a democratically elected government and so on and so forth[/QUOTE] Clarified my definition of "they" for you. I generally mean the various groups that have been lobbying for stricter gun control for the past 23 years in this country, too many to list. Once another incident happens the lobbyists of these various different groups will say these executive actions were not enough, and that we need even tighter controls on weapons and eventually none of its working we need to get these guns out of the hands of citizens to prevent crime.

[QUOTE=Ponder;39242830]this is the problem with these threads..it's mostly all opinion[/QUOTE] And the other problem is that both sides are so rooted in their opinions that nobody's opinions ever change. That and I swear I've seen the same damn arguments 4 times already.

Can anyone explain to me the reasoning behind banning AP bullets and how it's going to protect cops, isn't the average body armor only effective against soft tips ? sorry if i'm terribly wrong.

[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;39242787]Banning things doesn't magically fix the problem. It didn't work for prohibition and it won't work now.[/QUOTE] We've effectively controlled most drug precursors from getting into the hands of people looking to synthesize certain drugs (meth, lsd, etc...), we can effectively control certain weapons and accessories for them too with enough money and manpower.

the EO's are great I agree with all of them. I just wonder how he's going to execute some of them, how is he going ensure background checks for private sales for example? I guess we'll find out later.

[QUOTE=Deep;39242848]Can anyone explain to me the reasoning behind banning AP bullets and how it's going to protect cops, isn't the average body armor only effective against soft tips ? sorry if i'm terribly wrong.[/QUOTE] I assume you mean police officers being armed with AP ammunition? Basically the hollywood shootout, they don't want to see that happen again. Most body armor has trouble stopping handgun rounds, unless you bundle it all over your body like the robbers in the LA shootout did.

[QUOTE=gay_idiot;39242864]We've effectively controlled most drug precursors from getting into the hands of people looking to synthesize certain drugs (meth, lsd, etc...), we can effectively control certain weapons and accessories for them too with enough money and manpower.[/QUOTE] Money and manpower we don't have to spare. That's why this is a problem. The government is not attacking the most critical and important issues with these kinds of EOs.

[QUOTE=gay_idiot;39242864]We've effectively controlled most drug precursors from getting into the hands of people looking to synthesize certain drugs (meth, lsd, etc...), we can effectively control certain weapons and accessories for them too with enough money and manpower.[/QUOTE] lol'n at this

[QUOTE=Deep;39242848]Can anyone explain to me the reasoning behind banning AP bullets and how it's going to protect cops, isn't the average body armor only effective against soft tips ? sorry if i'm terribly wrong.[/QUOTE] Cop armor, for the most part, will only stop small arms fire. Also, why would you need to have AP rounds as a civilian to begin with?

[QUOTE=areolop;39242910]Cop armor, for the most part, will only stop small arms fire. Also, why would you need to have AP rounds as a civilian to begin with?[/QUOTE] the answer is "they don't" but you'll get the "why does anyone need X either lets ban that too" argument

I personally don't think we need armor-piercing rounds either because those aren't a crucial type of ammunition by any means.

[QUOTE=areolop;39242910]Cop armor, for the most part, will only stop small arms fire. Also, why would you need to have AP rounds as a civilian to begin with?[/QUOTE] Do you even know what "small arms fire" is? Because if you do, then you'd know that saying it would stop small arms fire is a massive overstatement. [editline]16th January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Protocol7;39242941]I personally don't think we need armor-piercing rounds either because those aren't a crucial type of ammunition by any means.[/QUOTE] AP rounds are insignificant, and we shouldn't waste time writing legislation on them.

[QUOTE=Deep;39242848]Can anyone explain to me the reasoning behind banning AP bullets and how it's going to protect cops, isn't the average body armor only effective against soft tips ? sorry if i'm terribly wrong.[/QUOTE] AP bullets from higher caliber rifles will go right through most body armor without even slowing down. But the regular vests that your average officer wears, even non AP bullets from 5.56 or 7.62 can go through them. And if they don't have plates in them, even if it does stop the round, it won't stop the force of the round, which can be just as deadly as not stopping it at all. A lot of officers also buy a kevlar vest and will wear it until it doesn't fit, or it just wears out and can't be worn anymore. Most people don't know this, but they actually have an expiration date, like food, and get weaker over time. Hollowpoints, however, almost no penetrating power. They'll get stopped by a vest no problem (Though I don't know if a 5.56 hollwpoint would stop), but who wants to buy hollowpoints for their rifles? They feed like shit, they're way less accurate and cost twice as much

But i totally agree that we don't need them.

I will be watching this with a bucket of popcorn, Obama has [I]really[/I] stirred the hornet's nest this time

[QUOTE=demoguy08;39243003]I will be watching this with a bucket of popcorn, Obama has [I]really[/I] stirred the hornet's nest this time[/QUOTE] Nothing wrong with stirring though

[QUOTE=scout1;39242708]Remember kids any attempt at progressive governance is the government trying to steal your rights Also no mention of WHO is this supposed evil mastermind, but I see a "they" in there. Ignoring the fact that the US is a democratically elected government and so on and so forth[/QUOTE] Progress is not taking guns from responsible gun owners. Oh boy, Page king.

I find the concept of 'armor piercing' kind of silly when a .444 Marlin round can go through a quarter inch steel plate. That's this round: [IMG]http://www.marlinforum.com/images/8/8/3/lg-444-marlin-240-jsp-2400-fps-21.jpg[/IMG]

To me, a lot of the background checks makes sense, but it's pointless to ban a weapon based on it's looks; especially if a criminal wants to get a rifle that shoots in full auto, then they'll find a way to get one. I know a guy who used to live in California (presumably in bad parts) where he knew he could get an automatic AK for several hundred dollars (cheaply because they're not easy to conceal) - although a Mac-10 would cost upwards of a thousand because of its concealability, and gang members/criminals would buy them, too. I play airsoft and fire real steel and I can vouch for the fact that reloading can be quickly and easily with practice - 10 rounds or 30 rounds, a criminal could just buy more magazines to make up for the magazine capacity limit.

[QUOTE=Sir_takeslot;39243038]Progress is not taking guns from responsible gun owners.[/QUOTE] Nobody is taking guns from gun owners, just banning certain guns and accessories from being sold.

[QUOTE=Ponder;39243014]Nothing wrong with stirring though[/QUOTE] Think about that statement in a literal sense and see how it applies to the figurative meaning. [editline]16th January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=gay_idiot;39243057]Nobody is taking guns from gun owners, just banning certain guns and accessories from being sold.[/QUOTE] "Nobody is taking guns from gun owners, just taking away certain guns and accessories."

[QUOTE=gay_idiot;39243057]Nobody is taking guns from gun owners, just banning certain guns and accessories from being sold.[/QUOTE] Implementing an unenforceable ban on aesthetically scary guns really stops gun crime, good work.

[QUOTE=Daemonshadow;39243045]About armor piercing, a .444 Marlin round can go through a quarter inch steel plate.[/QUOTE] All the armor piercing talk is pretty silly, when it comes down to it criminals (real criminals) can get their hands on anything they'd like, and all it takes to make some semi-decent AP rounds is a lighter, commission of a felony and some free time.

[QUOTE=gay_idiot;39243057]Nobody is taking guns from gun owners, just banning certain guns and accessories from being sold.[/QUOTE] Okay. Let me be more descriptive with my comment then. Progress is not taking the ability to sell guns to responsible gun owners. Simply because those guns have a fold-able stock, or an extra grip.

[QUOTE=Looter;39243092]All the armor piercing talk is pretty silly, when it comes down to it criminals (real criminals) can get their hands on anything they'd like, and all it takes to make some semi-decent AP rounds is a lighter, commission of a felony and some free time.[/QUOTE] And if you're using an AK or AR-15, you don't even need AP. Even your run of the mil 9mm FMJ can shoot through two doors of a car

[QUOTE=gay_idiot;39243057]Nobody is taking guns from gun owners, just banning certain guns and accessories from being sold.[/QUOTE] no, just making it illegal to sell certain firearms because of their looks lol [editline]16th January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Looter;39243092]All the armor piercing talk is pretty silly, when it comes down to it criminals (real criminals) can get their hands on anything they'd like, and all it takes to make some semi-decent AP rounds is a lighter, commission of a felony and some free time.[/QUOTE] AP ammo is only useful for going through plates or through thick walls. Your normal ammo can go through your typical bulletproof vest, it typically has trouble stopping handgun rounds.

[QUOTE=Protocol7;39243090]Implementing an unenforceable ban on aesthetically scary guns really stops gun crime, good work.[/QUOTE] That are statistically a ridiculously insignificant percentage of crime.