Mayor Predicts “Waco-Style Standoff” In Response to Obama Gun Confiscation - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Jdeedler;39274279]It's not that hard to take semi-auto versions of machine guns and make them automatic again. Solving nothing.[/QUOTE] Actually it is. Most Modern AR-15's (the civilian variant of what the military uses, and they're very very far and between) are impossible to have a auto or burst-auto trigger group put in place because of the way the lower receiver is designed. Making an AK full auto would be full retard, it would ruin your accuracy, see bumpfire stocks and Hollywood shootout. Most other guns you would need specific parts for. [B]EDIT:[/B] What a lot of people fail to realize is that fully automatic is not as deadly and precise as it is in hollywood movies. The military uses fully automatic fire for suppression. Semi autos are more precise because it forces you to aim at the target again after every shot.

[QUOTE=Jdeedler;39274279]It's not that hard to take semi-auto versions of machine guns and make them automatic again. Solving nothing.[/QUOTE] No it isn't. You know nothing about guns and shouldn't have a say in this matter.

[QUOTE=Apache249;39274480]No it isn't. You know nothing about guns and shouldn't have a say in this matter.[/QUOTE] Aren't you just the pretentious master gunsmith. Thanks for enlightening me. Edit: Point being. You should have to go through the stringent regulations for any firearm like you would for licensing for a fully automatic excluding hunting rifles and shotguns.

[QUOTE=Jdeedler;39274515]Aren't you just the pretentious master gunsmith. Thanks for enlightening me. Edit: Point being. You should have to go through the stringent regulations for any firearm like you would for licensing for a fully automatic excluding [b]hunting rifles and shotguns.[/b][/QUOTE] Ah, thats where you invalidated your argument, if you excluded the insult at the beginning because somebody called you out for being blatantly wrong. I'm sure your definition of a hunting rifle is a rifle with a wood stock and scope, right? Those are just as deadly as an "assault weapon". Their only differences is the color and a pistol grip, 2 completely cosmetic items. [editline]19th January 2013[/editline] Which one do you consider to be the hunting rifle? [img]http://i925.photobucket.com/albums/ad98/MNDesignSS/Mini14/IMG_6228.jpg[/img] This guy here, or [img]http://images.huffingtonpost.com/2011-07-27-RugerMini14TacticalRifle.jpg[/img] This guy here?

I'm sure we'd see our friendly mass murderers running around in theaters with their 22. Oh and those are the same :)

[QUOTE=Jdeedler;39274609]I'm sure we'd see our friendly mass murderers running around in theaters with their 22. Oh and those are the same :)[/QUOTE] I'm quite surprised you were able to point that out. They're the same rifle and equally as deadly, but one fits the specifications for a hunting rifle and the other doesn't. Banning or issuing licensing based on cosmetics is absolutely but fucking retarded. If you're going to ban something at least be logical about it, ban functions not cosmetics. And a .22lr is just as deadly as a .223 in the right hands. And either way, if a person wants to kill someone with a rifle, they can steel one or obtain it illegally, most mass shootings do so anyways so any sort of gun legislation is pointless. See: columbine.

[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;39274632]I'm quite surprised you were able to point that out. They're the same rifle and equally as deadly, but one fits the specifications for a hunting rifle and the other doesn't. Banning or issuing licensing based on cosmetics is absolutely but fucking retarded. If you're going to ban something at least be logical about it, ban functions not cosmetics. And a .22lr is just as deadly as a .223 in the right hands. And either way, if a person wants to kill someone with a rifle, they can steel one or obtain it illegally, most mass shootings do so anyways so any sort of gun legislation is pointless. See: columbine.[/QUOTE] It's kind of ironic now that I think about it. We want to ban guns that kill when all guns can kill regardless of the original intent of the weapon Quite true. More effort needs to be done to lock down the illegal gun market. Generally laws like this end up hurting the normal person more then the criminal.

[QUOTE=HkSniper;39256612]Excuse me good citizen. Studies have shown that the internet has been a big highway of child pornography. In order to protect our children, we have issued a step by step program to fight this growing threat to our children's safety. First, we will have to take your computer away from you. Regardless if you have done anything illegal with it or not. You will be forced to buy newly regulated computers that help fight child pornography. We expect your full cooperation, citizen.[/QUOTE] Except computers aren't created just to view child pornography. Guns are created to murder humans with ease. How, in a modern society, is it a right, to own a 'tool' created specifically to kill people. Why. It's beyond insane. (Don't bother comparing guns with other household objects capable of murder. They all have other useful primary purposes, and guns make killing a whole lot easier).

[QUOTE=Jdeedler;39274671]Quite true. More effort needs to be done to lock down the illegal gun market. Generally laws like this end up hurting the normal person more then the criminal.[/QUOTE] My point exactly, licensing, banning, and restricting firearms is pointless at this point. It would have needed to be done at the very beginning, or restricted at the very beginning. Like the NFA and the 1980's ban.

[QUOTE=Rusty100;39274686] Guns are created to murder humans with ease.[/QUOTE] Mine isn't, lol, next argument.

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;39274705]Mine isn't, lol, next argument.[/QUOTE] Sorry dude but yeah it is. Just because you don't use it for that doesn't mean it wasn't made for it.

[QUOTE=Jdeedler;39274609]I'm sure we'd see our friendly mass murderers running around in theaters with their 22. Oh and those are the same :)[/QUOTE] M1A or Ruger Minis aren't .22. Either .223 or 7.62 " I don't know much about guns but guns kill people"

[QUOTE=Rusty100;39274712]Sorry dude but yeah it is. Just because you don't use it for that doesn't mean it wasn't made for it.[/QUOTE] But that's because it wasn't. It was not made for murder. It was made for shooting at paper targets.

[QUOTE=counterpo0;39274716]M1A or Ruger Minis aren't .22. Either .223 or 7.62 " I don't know much about guns but guns kill people"[/QUOTE] I wasn't implying they were .22. he posted some images and I commented about them afterward.

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;39274727]But that's because it wasn't. It was not made for murder. It was made for shooting at paper targets.[/QUOTE] is it a gun that shoots lead bullets? ie its without a doubt capable of killing a human being if you shoot them with it? then yeah it's a killing machine sorry

[QUOTE=Jdeedler;39274736]I wasn't implying they were. he posted some images and I commented afterward.[/QUOTE] I actually made the edit a minute or 2 before you posted.

[QUOTE=UziXxX;39256824]I refuse to shoot any anuthority that comes to cease my firearms. For those who will resist this, do not be violent, do not respond. I'm simply not going to turn it in. Simple.[/QUOTE] I would tell them under the 2nd amendment I have the right to bear arms, you cannot take my guns as the constitution is law over everything.

you can have your side of the argument without being ridiculous and pretending guns aren't machines made to kill people dude

[QUOTE=Kopimi;39274750]is it a gun that shoots lead bullets? ie its without a doubt capable of killing a human being if you shoot them with it? then yeah it's a killing machine sorry[/QUOTE] But it's intentions are not that, nor is it being used for such. Congratulations, you're using the same stupid argument as people use for "Oh u could kill some1 wit a frying pan 2!!"

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;39274727]But that's because it wasn't. It was not made for murder. It was made for shooting at paper targets.[/QUOTE] Are you willingly that blind? The reason guns exist, was because we needed a way to kill eachother easier. Years and years later, some of them are used for sport. As a secondary purpose. The reason you have the gun you have was because they were created, for murdering. And whether or not you use it for sport does not negate it's ability as a deadly weapon. One that, I stress, is designed to kill people. If your gun really was created to shoot at paper targets, it wouldn't be very powerful at all. It'd have only the power required to pierce paper! But I'm guessing whatever bullets you use are a lot more capable than that. (Hint: they're designed to pierce flesh).

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;39274758]But it's intentions are not that, nor is it being used for such. Congratulations, you're using the same stupid argument as people use for "Oh u could kill some1 wit a frying pan 2!!"[/QUOTE] No because frying pans are made to fry food. Guns are made to shoot at people.

[QUOTE=Kopimi;39274750]is it a gun that shoots lead bullets? ie its without a doubt capable of killing a human being if you shoot them with it? then yeah it's a killing machine sorry[/QUOTE] We're pretty much at that point. I could design a weapon and say that it's only for shooting watermelons , and it will be used in what ever way the consumer ends up using it. It reminds me of mutually assured destruction. Since criminals have access to weaponry , Everyone else needs to be as well to defend themselves or keep them at bay.

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;39274758]But it's intentions are not that, nor is it being used for such. Congratulations, [B]you're using the same stupid argument as people use for "Oh u could kill some1 wit a frying pan 2!!"[/B][/QUOTE] lmfao come on dude be real here guns, since their inception, have been and still are weapons of war and death. by very definition of their function they're made to kill living things. i'm not using a "you could kill people with a frying pan" analogy, you're using a "frying pans aren't made for cooking! i use them as a percussion instrument in my band" analogy. no matter what your intent or purposes are, its made to kill and you're being ridiculous by denying that.

[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;39274751]I actually made the edit a minute or 2 before you posted.[/QUOTE] I must be in the future because I posted after your post and made the edit when I saw yours.

[QUOTE=Kopimi;39274789]lmfao come on dude be real here guns, since their inception, have been and still are weapons of war and death. by very definition of their function they're made to kill living things. i'm not using a "you could kill people with a frying pan" analogy, you're using a "frying pans aren't made for cooking! i use them as a percussion instrument in my band" analogy. no matter what your intent or purposes are, its made to kill and you're being ridiculous by denying that.[/QUOTE] It's intentions are irrelevant even if it's not hurting anybody or anything. Ok. [editline]19th January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Jdeedler;39274800]I must be in the future because I posted after your post and made the edit when I saw yours.[/QUOTE] "automerge"

[QUOTE=Kopimi;39274789]lmfao come on dude be real here guns, since their inception, have been and still are weapons of war and death. by very definition of their function they're made to kill living things. i'm not using a "you could kill people with a frying pan" analogy, you're using a "frying pans aren't made for cooking! i use them as a percussion instrument in my band" analogy. no matter what your intent or purposes are, its made to kill and you're being ridiculous by denying that.[/QUOTE] What is the purpose of arguing about what guns were designed for? It doesn't have any relevance to the actual issues that exist, which is the violent crimes that use firearms. Ownership of guns isn't what causes those violent crimes, it is the underlying social problems. Trying to impose excessive gun control is wasteful and takes focus away from actually dealing with things like income inequality which causes crime. All you are trying to do is demonizing people who own guns

[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;39274818]It's intentions are irrelevant even if it's not hurting anybody or anything. Ok.[/QUOTE] ..yes? if the argument is whether or not guns are machines designed to kill then yes the intent of the user is irrelevant.. [editline]19th January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Valnar;39274835]What is the purpose of arguing about what guns were designed for?[/QUOTE] ask zillamaster [QUOTE=Valnar;39274835]It doesn't have any relevance to the actual issues that exist, which is the violent crimes that use firearms. Ownership of guns isn't what causes those violent crimes, it is the underlying social problems.[/QUOTE] ownership of guns is what enables people to commit those violent crimes with such ease and frequency [QUOTE=Valnar;39274835]Trying to impose excessive gun control is wasteful and takes focus away from actually dealing with things like income inequality which causes crime.[/QUOTE] ok well we should definitely get on that but seeing as solving income equality is a rather time consuming campaign, we should probably handle gun control at the same time [QUOTE=Valnar;39274835]All you are trying to do is demonizing people who own guns[/QUOTE] i own guns.. pretty sure i'm not demonizing myself

[QUOTE=Valnar;39274835]What is the purpose of arguing about what guns were designed for? All you are trying to do is demonizing people who own guns[/QUOTE] I'm pretty sure he was just enforcing the fact that guns are violent by their nature. I didn't see where he tried to demonize anyone.

[QUOTE=Kopimi;39274839]..yes? if the argument is whether or not guns are machines designed to kill then yes the intent of the user is irrelevant..[/QUOTE] Well yeah, most guns are designed for the express purpose of harming and killing sentient creatures, whether it be deer or people. But saying all guns are designed for killing isn't true, theres many .22lr and smaller caliber rifles and handguns used for sport shooting. Even still, a rifle that was originally designed to kill doesn't mean it has to be used that way.

[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;39274869]Well yeah, most guns are designed for the express purpose of harming and killing sentient creatures, whether it be deer or people. But saying all guns are designed for killing isn't true, theres many .22lr and smaller caliber rifles and handguns used for sport shooting. Even still, a rifle that was originally designed to kill doesn't mean it has to be used that way.[/QUOTE] if all you want to do is pierce paper for target shooting are you not able to use rubber bullets or some other less-lethal ammunition?