# Here comes the executive order on your guns and magazines



## somedevildawg (Jun 20, 2011)

Bet you a dime to a doughnut that's what we're fixing to get rammed down our throat now, 19 executive orders on various guns and related parts, said it before, foot squarely on the gas and resting on metal.


----------



## IslandBreeze (Nov 6, 2012)

If it's assault rifles & large capacity magazines I'm fine with that. I have a 9 round clip in my Colt 45, If I can't hit some thing with 9 bullets I don't think anymore bullets is going to b that helpful, but that's just me. :/


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

personally, what was released wasn't near as bad as I thought it might be.

Personally I don't own a handgun, never seen the point in it, _but_ unlike some people just because I don't own one and don't see the point of it doesn't mean I don't support other people's right to own a handgun as long as it's used and obtained _legally_.

I prefer to reach out and touch something instead. Have a .222, a British 303 and the real 30 cal Carbine, also an assortment of slug and bird guns.


----------



## IslandBreeze (Nov 6, 2012)

mlappin, I agree..........but I would have a hell of a time putting one of my rifles in my nightstand. haha


----------



## urednecku (Oct 18, 2010)

Keep one thing in mind. Like my Granddaddy said, "give 'em an inch & they'll take a mile." IF / when they get one style firearm banned from the law-abiding, (the lawless will keep 'em, and be glad to know you don't have one) it'll be much easier to slip in another ban, then another.
And we all know the only difference (function wise) between a "military style assault rifle" and say a Remington model 750 is cosmetics, or the way it looks.


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

Oh I know. It's the same with gas prices, raise it a little at a time so the sheep get used to it then raise it a little more. We'd have a rebellion for sure if gas would double overnight, same goes for guns. Take a little here and a little there on gn rights and most of the sheep won't even notice until nothing is left then they'll try to figure out wtf happened.


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

IslandBreeze said:


> If it's assault rifles & large capacity magazines I'm fine with that. I have a 9 round clip in my Colt 45, If I can't hit some thing with 9 bullets I don't think anymore bullets is going to b that helpful, but that's just me. :/


I was taught to hunt with an old single shot slug gun. I laugh when I hear somebody take a shot, then unload the mag wen they missed with the first shot. Seriously if you missed when it was standing still what's your chance of hitting a deer on the run?


----------



## somedevildawg (Jun 20, 2011)

IslandBreeze said:


> If it's assault rifles & large capacity magazines I'm fine with that. I have a 9 round clip in my Colt 45, If I can't hit some thing with 9 bullets I don't think anymore bullets is going to b that helpful, but that's just me. :/


 lol, ur killin me island, I bet if u needed that 10 th for some remote reason......like the sob was shooting back.......you would sure like to have it, fact is you would pay any amount of money for another one, maybe we should limit all weapons to single shots? Then maybe we could limit all bullet weight to 50 grans or less, perhaps some of those rubber bullets would be better. Ya know while we're at it, lets get something done about cell phones that kill a whole lot more people every year, just as indiscriminate as this lunatic.....perhaps we could do something like make texting and driving "illegal". Or drinking and driving, that too could be "illegal". All of that stuff would be stopped immediately when it became "illegal". 
It's always a knee-jerk reaction when this happens and no better time to strike than when the iron is hot, because some people......will just say "ya what the hell, I really don't see the need in one of those anyway". 
I remember u said you've never been hog huntin, if you ain't got a stoner rifle or equivalent, u ain't gonna make a very big dent in the "out of control" hog population.
It's so easy to see, this erosion of our civil liberties.......before long that wonderful colt 45 may be "on the list" all it takes is one lunatic....


----------



## IslandBreeze (Nov 6, 2012)

devildawg, I didn't say I didn't have a 2nd clip.







I don't care if they have 20- 9 or 10 round clips. When they empty they have to take a second or 2 to reload & get one in the chamber. To me that's better than unloading 50-100 rounds on people & innocent people not having a chance to get away or tackle the guy.

When it comes to drunk driving & the govt's emphasis on it, it has dropped 52% since 1982 & 35% since 1991. To me that's a positive. Hell, I remember always riding from the farm with my dad after doing hay all day & evening & him driving with a beer between his legs & me riding with no seatbelt on. It was dumb & I couldn't imagine doing that with my girls. It comes down to common sense & human life for me, not politics or thinking the govt is coming after my guns. After a couple of massacres it's the public that is rearing it's head & there is nothing wrong with that.

I said that I HAD went hog hunting in south TX. Btw, I need to get that info for u. We didn't gun hunt there, it was a bow hunt only at that time. I think they did gun hunting at other times. And if I had went gun hunting I wouldn't take an assault rifle. If I wanted to shoot one of those, I would of joined the Marines.









I think I'm going to be in your neck of the woods in a couple of weeks devildawg. Keep a lookout for a short bald guy with a soul patch who looks lost. Haha


----------



## somedevildawg (Jun 20, 2011)

Lol, something tells me u ain't cut out to be a Marine, no sense in throwing them under the bus, and let me axe u this, what the hell is the definition of an assault rifle? It just seems a bit ridiculous to have a term so liberally (wait....it's not too ridiculous) applied to weapons. The funniest thing is your comment that "someone could tackle the guy" wth? So, in the time it takes a feller to drop a mag and insert another one, someone is going to tackle this guy after just receiving rounds? That's crazy stuff there. I definitely want that dude on my side. 
Ya know when the guy went into the movie theatre and shot it up and killed some good folks, he had one of those 100 rd drum mags, after about 7 rounds it jammed up on him, probably saved lives, perp wasn't expecting that, was unprepared for that, if he had the small mags, they are ultra-dependable, he woulda simply dropped and locked another, 3 sec. Max. But ya know I could do that with my beretta, my fn, my glock, my ruger, even my BAR. I just don't see the point, what's gonna be next? Do you really think this will solve the problem? How do you stop this kinda crap? In most cases, these are nut jobs that have already been diagnosed with a mental illness, they are our bi-polars, our manics, our socially dysfunctional, our sociopaths our psychopaths. The only way to really protect us from them is to lock their ass up, is that what we should do? I doubt very seriously that we could curb this type violence, just too random, you don't have a clue who the enemy is, how do you do that, how about.......take everyone else's rights away from them. 
Now for the record, I ain't got a mag over 20 rounds, for the afore mentioned reasons, but I could do some serious damage with some of those if I went berserk . So, did it really do any good? Or did it just make us feel warm and gooshy inside, we helped to protect the children, did we really? 
I can tell ya the next person that loses a loved one to a crazy with a gun, knife, bomb, hammer, etc. ain't gonna think we did a damn thing. 
Btw I have no problem drinking a beer after a hard day and driving myself or my kids anywhere, unlike the gov. I believe I can handle one (if I drink it really slow) and still function just fine, like you I grew up with that, but I don't think my father ever put me or my life in jeapordy. You see, he fought to defend these very rights that are being infringed upon, was willing to sacrifice his life for the greater good of all Americans. 
Come up with some kinda comprehensive reform, ok, knee jerk reactions have proven time and again that all they do is erode law abiding citizens rights to protect and defend their property or life. 
I wish you would call if ya get down this way, (something tells me I'll pick u out of the crowd, lol) I'll take ya to lunch and well have some sweet tea and BBQ, a staple here, or if its breakfast well have some grits and eggs, either way well break bread and come a lil closer to gettin ur ass over to the other side.


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

first of all, it takes what, a few seconds to change a magazine? In all honesty I don't see a nut case ceasing fire for two seconds to change a clip making a huge difference in a body count.


----------



## IslandBreeze (Nov 6, 2012)

devildawg, that's why I didn't join. I've never been to much on people getting n my space. I always wanted to go thru the bootcamp for the training but that's about it. My 2 grandpas were n the Army & seen some fighting but it stopped with them. I would never throw them people under the bus. I'm the one that says it pisses me off when they have to go thru metal detectors at airports or take off there jackets. But I also say just because ur n the service doesn't make u a hero. There's always a Timothy McVay or that muslim that killed them people on base in Texas.

I told another guy on here that I don't know the definition of an assault rifle but they don't call them defense rifles. When I was talking about the Marines, I was meaning that there trained to use them. Kinda like a grenade launcher, a fighter jet or a nuclear submarine.....I like leaving those to the professionals also.

I'm not syaing that people are going to look to tackle a guy everytime. I'm saying that the guy in the Colorado movie theater shooting was within 5-10 feet of some of those people. I don't know about u but if I'm that close to somebody reloading, somebody is going to the ground with me. Most people can run 10-15 yards in 3 seconds if there life depended on it, that's all I'm saying.

Would love to grab some sweet tea & bbq. We have some pretty good ones also up here since were between Memphis & KC.







U will get me to agree on some things but u will get me on that side about as soon as I get u on this side. I think we all have a lot more in common than we think. It's the few things that people disagree about that makes it seem worse than it is because people tend to be passionate by nature. All you have to do is look at some of the tedder arguements in the past on this site. Haha


----------



## somedevildawg (Jun 20, 2011)

Ah yes, tedders, always so many opinions on those. Mine is like my gun, u'll have to pry it from my cold dead hands.....er.....Ok my younguns may give the Tedder up fairly quickly


----------



## deadmoose (Oct 30, 2011)

Yup. Because some crazy somewhere started running people over with his tractor we should start by looking at the tractor. Must have been a problem with the tractor? Fuel tank was too big. If it was smaller he wouldn't have made it there. So he wouldn't have run the ten pedestrians over. And, if we limited him to a one gallon fuel tank, and every other farmer to a one gallon tank, we will save at least one life. Maybe. At some time in the future. At whatever cost it takes....

Sound familiar? Same logic.

True gun control involves hitting your target. The government's version (like everything else) involves limiting individual freedom for "the greater good". Ie no freedom at all. Slavery in a different way.


----------



## deadmoose (Oct 30, 2011)

Before you consider limiting my ammo capacity tell me how it is ok by agreeing to limit your fuel capacity.

Cannot do it when it is a relatable cause that you care for.


----------



## rjmoses (Apr 4, 2010)

I will gladly give up my guns and ammo when the governments give up spending and taxes. But they have to go first.

Ralph


----------



## dubltrubl (Jul 19, 2010)

deadmoose said:


> Slavery in a different way.


Very true. While I can't question whether someone's intentions are good or bad, I can question how it will affect my liberties. The fact remains, no amount of legislation can control bad behavior unless all of your liberties are removed, and you're then left with only the things you are ALLOWED to do. This is why I just LOVE gridlock. Keep the A**hats at each other's throats so they don't take something ELSE away from me. I really wish they'd only be allowed to be in session 3 months out of the year!


----------



## IslandBreeze (Nov 6, 2012)

deadmoose, are u really comparing a mass murder of kindergarteners & people at a movie theater with somebody driving a tractor over somebody??? The size of a fuel tank with the ammo capacity of an assault rifle?

My 2 favorite references/comparisons by Repouticans: 1) Gun control involves hitting ur target. I especially love it when they put a hot blonde on a t-shirt pointing a pistol. rolling eyes 2) Anytime something doesn't go a certain way people compare it to slavery. I can see it now from the future, "Ah yes, it was bad back in 2013, my grandpa had it rough. They banned his AR15 & his 2- 100 round drums. It was hard times back then, reminds me of when all them colored folks had to farm & pick cotton as slaves all them years. Of course them colored folk had all the work they wanted, a roof over there head & got to eat once a day. What did my grandpa get? Nothing!!"

When u make goofy (trying to b nice & clean) comparisons & use logic like that it's not hard to see why the Repouticnas couldn't beat Obama even when he was down.


----------



## dubltrubl (Jul 19, 2010)

IslandBreeze said:


> When u make goofy (trying to b nice & clean) comparisons & use logic like that it's not hard to see why the Repouticnas couldn't beat Obama even when he was down.


I respectfully disagree. I honestly believe the reason he won is education. Especially regarding civics. Many people don't even know what form of government we have, nor do they know what's contained in the DoI, BoR, or Constitution. Neither do they know the fundamental difference between a subject, or a citizen. Many don't even realize after what document/s our laws are based on and why. As such, they fall for all of the promises these douchbags like "O" and Reid spout, and forget how to conduct themselves as free men/women.


----------



## somedevildawg (Jun 20, 2011)

Breeze, I believe the analogy was made because of how ridiculous it is, but there may be more people killed on tractors every year than people killed by a lunatic with an "assault" weapon, no idea, but if its even close...........wouldn't hurt to put us another law in there, besides it makes us look like we r doing something constructive.....bunch of morons keep electing us back, they deserve some action, besides the economy is in the tank, (I thought we agreed it was Bush's fault, which one, doesn't matter) we need something to get public support for what we r doing, we need to get on top of this thing early while sentiment runs high! Damned weapons, well get them.......


----------



## IslandBreeze (Nov 6, 2012)

U mean just like the same promises the right falls for w/ their candidate? I don't know any promises that I fell for w/ Obama....oh yeah I do. Guantanamo to b closed & the oil wars to b over with. I've said on here many times that the left has it's faults & plenty of them, but the right seems to think it never f's up & everything they say is the golden rule. btw, I voted for Obama twice & I think I conduct myself pretty well as a free man.


----------



## IslandBreeze (Nov 6, 2012)

devildawg, I'm sure there are more people killed on tractors but that's mainly due to poor operator error (rolling over, crushing, pto hangups). If crazy people was driving inside malls, movie theaters or schools & running over innocent kids people would be wanting a buffer zone for tractors around schools the same as liquor stores have a buffer zone around schools. Btw, I LOVE me some Patron margaritas, but u don't see me yelling about my civil liberties are being infringed upon because I have to drive at least another 1/4 mile to buy a bottle of Patron because it's close to a church or school. I don't go to church obviously but if that makes them people feel better not to have a store that sells beer within 300 feet of their church I can deal with that. I call it give and take. I might not agree but I can see their issue.

Maybe somebody can tell me how this sounds. Once the govt made the law that a liqour store had to be at least 300' from the church/school, they started walking all over my individual liberties. Now a church that is open 2 days a week is dictating a business that is open 7 days a week. Not only are they pissing on my freedoms, they are pissing on the capitalist market of this great country. It's just another form of slavery.

It sounds retarded to me even being written from a left point of view


----------



## dubltrubl (Jul 19, 2010)

IslandBreeze said:


> U mean just like the same promises the right falls for w/ their candidate? I don't know any promises that I fell for w/ Obama....oh yeah I do. Guantanamo to b closed & the oil wars to b over with. I've said on here many times that the left has it's faults & plenty of them, but the right seems to think it never f's up & everything they say is the golden rule. btw, I voted for Obama twice & I think I conduct myself pretty well as a free man.


I never claimed the so called "right" to be perfect or without their shortcomings. And if you honestly believe that the current president was the best choice for our nation, then good on you. However, those that voted party line just "because" are part of the problem with our nation. In case you haven't noticed, we've become less willing to participate in self-government and more inclined to let others do the thinking for us. That sir is where my beef is and you must admit this is symptomatic of our populance. My fear is that one of these days we will find ourselve in the position of having very few liberties at the expense of security. Like I stated before, bad behavior cannot be legislated, neither can rightousness. To this day I can still find no compelling reason why the law says I must wear a seatbelt or pay a fine. Who do I hurt if I choose to not wear one? Oh yeah, "You are a burden to the system if medical aid needs to be rendered to you if an accident occurs!" Yeah right! Who says I want to have anyone look after me? I'll pay for my own medical care, thank you very much! I don't need a master to look after me, I'm no one's subject or slave. So by having a nanny state tell me, and me abiding by a rule such as a seat belt law, I have abdicated one more small liberty that should be mine, and mine alone's decision to exercise or not. These little encroachements are housed in sweet little platitudes like, "If it just saves one life!" or "It's for the children". Hogwash! But then again it's not hogwash to someone that does not care if they remain truely free.
Regards,
Steve


----------



## deadmoose (Oct 30, 2011)

Correct. The idea of either regulation is absurd. That being said the difference is I have a constitutional right to keep and bear arms. What's next to go when you start eliminating rights guaranteed in the bill of rights?

Liberty and freedom go hand in hand. Tear both away and we are not citizens but subjects.


----------



## deadmoose (Oct 30, 2011)

Island- this is not a R or D thing. It is a question of believing in the constitution and the individual freedoms it grants versus picking and choosing which ones you agree with. While I disagree with you I am glad to defend your RIGHT to speak it.


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

Seriously...is anybody actually foolish or childish enough on this forum to believe the whole thing is actually about gun control? Drop the three letter word and you get what the government is truly after that is _control_ over it's citizens. Does anybody honestly think if Obummer gets all this past now he'll be done with guns and won't go for more next year? Or the year after? It's all about losing our freedoms a little at a time until none are left.


----------



## somedevildawg (Jun 20, 2011)

Heard Biden (what an idiot) telling the story a hunter had told him, "if you miss on the first one, what's the point in shooting the other 9, hang it up" he got a rousing chuckle in the room, perhaps because he looks so friggin goofy. So let me axe (Ebonics) u this, do you really think the founding fathers were talking about deer hunting? Really? We had just founded a new land, a new democracy, a new government in part because of the tyranny of the one we left, and you think they were talking about deer hunting? Nope, it's about protecting ourselves and our families from lunatics. You can group the gov. In if the shoe fits.......
And that hunter ain't NEVER hunted pigs, well maybe he "trophy" hunted a pig with a bow! I ain't never seen a pig I would consider a trophy, even if you put red lipstick on it........


----------



## IslandBreeze (Nov 6, 2012)

devildawg, u lost me on the pig hunting comment. Maybe I'm just to tired to comprehend.

I got news for ya, if it's to protect us from lunatics then we need to have an open season because we r overrun with em. I laugh when people say we need to lock up the crazy people, that would mean that we would lose half of the Dems & 1/2 of the Repubs. Unfortunately we would be losing some of our Haytalk brothers. Haha JK JK.


----------



## somedevildawg (Jun 20, 2011)

Lol, Probably starting with me according to my wife.......


----------



## cornshucker (Aug 22, 2011)

Agree with mlappin its all about control not just gun control. By the way that our constitution is set up the people are supposed to control the government not vice versa. The people are the government and should overthrow the government in the next 6 years by voting every incumbent out of office and setting up an eight year term limit in Washington and doing away with career politicians. Maybe then you could get get rid of brain dead illiterates such as Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. Way to many laws and regulations, to many government departments trying to do the thinking for the American Taxpayer who is in reality supposed to be the real government. As far as gun control I believe like the bumper sticker said (If guns kill then forks made Rosie O'Donnell fat.) As for some of the statements Ted Nugent made, read his book Ted, White, and Blue. Far more intelligent than Barack Obama.


----------



## deadmoose (Oct 30, 2011)

cornshucker said:


> Agree with mlappin its all about control not just gun control. By the way that our constitution is set up the people are supposed to control the government not vice versa. The people are the government and should overthrow the government in the next 6 years by voting every incumbent out of office and setting up an eight year term limit in Washington and doing away with career politicians. Maybe then you could get get rid of brain dead illiterates such as Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. Way to many laws and regulations, to many government departments trying to do the thinking for the American Taxpayer who is in reality supposed to be the real government. As far as gun control I believe like the bumper sticker said (If guns kill then forks made Rosie O'Donnell fat.) As for some of the statements Ted Nugent made, read his book Ted, White, and Blue. Far more intelligent than Barack Obama.


Yes! You are correct sir!

Freedom is my concern.


----------



## deadmoose (Oct 30, 2011)

Island, what all should the rest of us give up to make you feel better?


----------



## ANewman (Sep 20, 2012)

With the thought in mind of "if it saves just one" I offer the following:

Automobiles kill far more people than guns do. Of those auto related fatalities speed is a factor in a high percentage. So the govt should ban small cars because they don't " look" safe. Furthermore of the vehicles that are still legal to own they ( the govt) should restrict the capability of the vehicle to only allow it to go 35 mph!!! I'm sure that would save more than one life.

To me, that is the same rationale being used in the gun control issue. Not to mention, cars are not a constitutional right. Guns ARE!


----------



## IslandBreeze (Nov 6, 2012)

devildawg, I think our wives might b the crazy ones putting up with us. Haha

cornshucker, with all do respect, I would rather take an a$$whipping from every guy off this forum rather than read, let alone spend a hard earned dollar towards Ted Nugent. That man is no different to me than the people of Westboro Baptist.

deadmoose, I was pretty much labeled anti american when I was against illegal wire tapping. That was definitely a freedom that a whole bunch of people, or sheep as the Repubs like to call them, was willing to go along with for reasons unknown to me. It's not what's going to make me feel better. I have buddies that have assault rifles & I don't dislike them for it. I have pistols & rifles of my own, I just have never understood assault rifles, that's all. If assault rifles is legal, why us fully auto uzi's not legal? Why is rpg's not legal? Why is small ballistic missiles not legal? I'm not trying to bust ur balls, I'm just asking questions. When they say lock up crazy people, what's the requirements? Who decides? Obama? Congress? Local police dept? Judge? What's crazy to me (Ted Nugent) might not be crazy to you. Again, I'm pro gun, pro concealed, pro background check but anti assault & large ammo capacity.


----------



## deadmoose (Oct 30, 2011)

IslandBreeze said:


> deadmoose, I was pretty much labeled anti american when I was against illegal wire tapping. That was definitely a freedom that a whole bunch of people, or sheep as the Repubs like to call them, was willing to go along with for reasons unknown to me. It's not what's going to make me feel better. I have buddies that have assault rifles & I don't dislike them for it. I have pistols & rifles of my own, I just have never understood assault rifles, that's all. If assault rifles is legal, why us fully auto uzi's not legal? Why is rpg's not legal? Why is small ballistic missiles not legal? I'm not trying to bust ur balls, I'm just asking questions. When they say lock up crazy people, what's the requirements? Who decides? Obama? Congress? Local police dept? Judge? What's crazy to me (Ted Nugent) might not be crazy to you. Again, I'm pro gun, pro concealed, pro background check but anti assault & large ammo capacity.


Good point. All of the above SHOULD be legal as well.

I am pro constitution ( including the ENTIRE bill of rights). As to what to do: quit allowing these kids to grow up like that. When they refuse to do anything but get in trouble they shouldn't be told its ok. You are doing your best. Have a trophy. Instead shape up or ship out. Make personal responsibility take the place of frivolous lawsuits. Don't allow anyone to receive a check in one hand without producing something with the other. Teach people from a young age pride of accomplishment and hard work.

This is a start.


----------



## deadmoose (Oct 30, 2011)

Not illegal tapping. Missed that.


----------



## somedevildawg (Jun 20, 2011)

deadmoose said:


> Not illegal tapping. Missed that.


that was during the time when the Feds were trying to find pockets or factions of terrorists operating in the United States of america. They were not trying to infringe upon law abiding citizens, unless you happen to be Muslim, have ties to extremists, or had been to an terrorist training camp. We can compare that to this gun debacle but its in no way a comparison, in times of war we have the ability to do lots of things to protect the national interest, just ask the Japanese, not even remotely close to the same thing. Trying to get to the inside workings of terrorist cells is very hard work, tapping was essential to get real time info as to their inner workings. Perhaps we should have used conventional techniques, but then again, 3700 people were dead, I thnk that is a valid excuse to tap. But if you are a liberal, and you keep your head glued to most news channels one can understand why the correlation would be made. 
Lets see, an organized network of extremists hell bent on destroying America, that has already killed 1000s, or a crazy lunatic with a "assault" weapon that mercilessly killed his mother and innocent children, and then blew his brains out on his own. 
Does one even belong to be mentioned with the other? This is failed policy on our mentally ill, failed policy on unchecked video games, failed policy on mothers part, and yes failed policy on our gun control. 
I'm all in favor of tighter restrictions on gun purchases, crazies need not apply, but what about the parents of said crazies, can they protect themselves from the crazy living amongst them? How crazy is too much crazy? Lots of ? that need to be answered, guns are too easy to access for criminals, how do we stop that, by limiting how many the law abiding can purchase? That's crazy. You know often times when a person commits a crime, the first thing they do is throw out the gun crime, that is the possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, very often the penalty is non-existent.....I think that would be a good start.


----------



## IslandBreeze (Nov 6, 2012)

devildawg, with all do respect to you, that's the hypocrisy I'm talking about. You can't be all for the Constitution & then be against it whenever it's convenient. Illegal wire tapping to me as the govt trying to ban all guns. It's wrong. And there was plenty of innocent people that got wire tapped that had nothing to do with Al Qaeda.

deadmoose, I don't even know what to say in response to u thinking that uzi's, rpg's & ballistic missiles should be legal. I don't know if your serious or just trying to make a point. Hopefully ur just trying to make a point.


----------



## urednecku (Oct 18, 2010)

> You know often times when a person commits a crime, the first thing they do is throw out the gun crime, that is the possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, very often the penalty is non-existent.....I think that would be a good start.


THAT'S what I'm talking about. PROSECUTE, on the FEDERAL SIDE. And keep the other charges, to go on top of, in addition to.


----------



## dubltrubl (Jul 19, 2010)

IslandBreeze said:


> have buddies that have assault rifles & I don't dislike them for it. I have pistols & rifles of my own, I just have never understood assault rifles, that's all. If assault rifles is legal, why us fully auto uzi's not legal? Why is rpg's not legal? Why is small ballistic missiles not legal?


And I don't understand the term "assault rifle". This is a media term, nothing more,nothing less. What is commonly refered to as an assult rifle these days are simply semi-automatic rifles that have military appearance. If you look at any of the manufacturers websites, you'll not see any of them refer to the rifles by those terms. So who made up this term/definition? And just because it's a popular term, does not make it correct. Any rifle can be an assualt rifle if it's used in that manner to assualt someone. As a matter of fact, you can legally own a full auto UZI, M-14, M-4, AK47, BMG30, or any number of full auto firearms under the rules of the NFA. Just gotta jump through some hoops and pay through the nose. Perfectly legal, and for your information, that is best "bahaved" class of firearms in existence according to crime stats. You cannot however own an operational tank, missle, fighter jet, ect. This is because the SC has ruled that since these are typically crew served weapon systems, used by trained servicemen and they are not used by the "militia". OOPS! there we have that pesky term that anti-gunners like to use and say the 2A is only for the National Guard. However, the SC sees the militia as the "the people" meaning every able bodied individual capable of serving/defending their country.
Regards,
Steve


----------



## somedevildawg (Jun 20, 2011)

Island damn it, it's not because it is convenient, it's because it's in the interest of national security against friggin lunatics that have waged a calculated war against our very way of life. They find it reprehensible, hell they may be right from the looks of things, but I don't fly with the notion that its convenient. And I really don't think very many people were persecuted by wire tapping, and if you know any that were.......well you should choose your friends more carefully....








Guess the ole water boarding ideal made your stomach turn too? Personally I woulda been for drowning there ass but that's just me.....


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

somedevildawg said:


> Guess the ole water boarding ideal made your stomach turn too? Personally I woulda been for drowning there ass but that's just me.....


Considering what they gladly did to innocent people in the trade center, and what they do to their own countrymen or children, waterboarding is too good.

Why do we apply _our_ bill of rights to foreigners that would gladly kill us in our sleep?


----------



## rjmoses (Apr 4, 2010)

OK, guys. Forget about gun control. According to this article, we've got REAL problems!!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/16/donna-lange-breasts-smother-kill-boyfriend-everett-washington_n_2486189.html

I against banning assault breasts!

Ralph


----------



## IslandBreeze (Nov 6, 2012)

devidawg, I don't think anybody is being persecuted on the assault rifle side either. I'm not drawing a line in the sand on it, I just feel a different way than most on here. As for the water boarding, this is not going to b PC for some of u, but this is how I feel. There a laws in place for certain things like that. If you want to do that fine, but don't be screaming about it when they're doing that to our soldiers. I've employed a number of ex military & some are still my closest friends & I've heard some gruesome stuff that just makes me shake my head & wonder why. I will finish that with I don't like middle eastern people. I didn't before 9/11 & I don't now.

dubltrubl, of course there not going to use that term. They are smart enough to know the "hot button" words. It's kind of like sanitation engineer (trash man) or right to work (anti union). People typically aren't going to do there homework or they just don't care.

mlappin, because we are better than them.

rjmoses, loved it! I'm like Rodney Carrington, I've never seen a titty that I didn't like!!


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

When in Rome. If certain people act like animals then they should be treated the same. Do unto others doesn't apply in all certain situations.


----------



## somedevildawg (Jun 20, 2011)

I'll agree with that mlappin, as much as that sounds real good, in times of war I think certain circumstances require people on the ground to make that decision, not politicians. But I will admit, in the line of police work and military service, you often times have people that are predisposed to do some irrational things, but when it comes to extracting intel to save my soldiers, by any means necessary......I don't like anyone that wipes their ass with their hand, perhaps I'm predisposed to dislike/distrust people who wipe their ass with their hand. But it seems a bit ridiculous on hindsight to thnk we could ever move these people into a mainstream country, I'll repeat, they wipe their ass with their hand, something inherently wrong with that, at least to "modern civilizations" .....one step away from cavemen in some of those parts


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)




----------



## urednecku (Oct 18, 2010)

*Coming Thursday*: National "assault weapon" ban.

http://www.washingto...oming-thursday/


----------



## ANewman (Sep 20, 2012)

" Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National Firearms Act, to include: Background check of owner and any transferee; type and serial number of the firearm; positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint; certification from local law enforcement of identity and that possession would not violate State or local law; and dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration."

That's a quote from the article that uredneck posted a link to. How are they gonna enforce that? I don't plan on registering any guns that I might have that could hold more than 10 rounds.


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

ANewman said:


> " Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National Firearms Act, to include: Background check of owner and any transferee; type and serial number of the firearm; positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint; certification from local law enforcement of identity and that possession would not violate State or local law; and dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration."
> 
> That's a quote from the article that uredneck posted a link to. How are they gonna enforce that? I don't plan on registering any guns that I might have that could hold more than 10 rounds.


Good luck, I officially have no guns Washington so bite my ass. Everything in this house has been passed down thru the generations and was never registered. I have more than enough ammo from when you could just buy it with no ID as long as you looked old enough, kinda like beer. And it was dirt cheap then.


----------



## ANewman (Sep 20, 2012)

Not to mention the govt wants you to go thru a background check to determine if you can keep guns that you ALREADY LEGALLY OWN! WTH are they thinking! Me no comprende


----------



## Gearclash (Nov 25, 2010)

> *Me no comprende*


This wholly sums up what I think about the current proposed gun/ammunition laws. For every thing proposed I can think of at least several reasons why it wouldn't prevent another shooting tragedy somewhere. So where's the beef???


----------



## swmnhay (Jun 13, 2008)

_They are just going to whittle away at our rights.A little at a time,just making it stricter every time.They will add lisences and fees also would be my guess.Have to pay for the guberment employes for all of this crap.







_


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)




----------



## ANewman (Sep 20, 2012)

Why can the media and those pushing these bans not see that most of the gun- related crimes are committed by those that cannot legally own a gun or obtained it illegally? They are trying to fix a problem by addressing the wrong issues.


----------



## urednecku (Oct 18, 2010)

It's not about guns....it's about _*control*_

With few to no guns, citizens become subjects. Lots less chance of a successful rebellion if/when they try stuff like that implant.


----------



## rjmoses (Apr 4, 2010)

ANewman said:


> Why can the media and those pushing these bans not see that most of the gun- related crimes are committed by those that cannot legally own a gun or obtained it illegally? They are trying to fix a problem by addressing the wrong issues.


I agree.

It always appears easier to fix a problem by fixing a symptom rather than taking the time and effort to fix the cause. "Crooked-ness", whether it's with a gun or a pen, begins at the top and permeates a society.

Better leadership, with a basis of truth, trust and transparency, would go a long way towards better gun control, because we would be fixing the basic problem.

Ralph


----------



## Gearclash (Nov 25, 2010)

> Better leadership, with a basis of truth, trust and transparency, would go a long way towards better gun control, because we would be fixing the basic problem.


Yup, along with an understanding of the infinite value of a human life.


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

Gearclash said:


> Yup, along with an understanding of the infinite value of a human life.


A interesting thought struck me today while delivering hay. The Amish own guns, their children grow up with guns in the house and learn to use them at a young age, but how much violence from the Amish have you ever heard about? Maybe violence towards the Amish from outsiders but not originating with the Amish themselves.

Seems to me the feds are trying to regulate morality by controlling guns, attempts in the past to legislate morality have always been dismal failures.

Maybe the blame should be placed on Hollywood and parents that use video games, TV and the schools to babysit/raise their kids and the mindset that me, me, me is the new way to think and not place the blame on a tool that the Amish use without perpetrating violence against their fellow man.


----------



## urednecku (Oct 18, 2010)

They _think_ they have the solution, but they can't figure out what the problem is.


----------



## swmnhay (Jun 13, 2008)

urednecku said:


> They _think_ they have the solution, but they can't figure out what the problem is.


They are the problem.


----------



## ANewman (Sep 20, 2012)

Gearclash said:


> Yup, along with an understanding of the infinite value of a human life.


Not to open another can of worms but... they don't seem to mind the millions of innocent babies killed over the past few decades due to abortion. BUT if the assault weapons ban can save just one life its worth it...


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

ANewman said:


> Not to open another can of worms but... they don't seem to mind the millions of innocent babies killed over the past few decades due to abortion. BUT if the assault weapons ban can save just one life its worth it...


Yup, more hypocrites. It's okay to infringe on my right to choose which handgun or rifle I will legally buy and use, yet it's a huge screaming no-no to tell a woman she can't commit murder on a whim.


----------



## urednecku (Oct 18, 2010)

swmnhay said:


> They are the problem.


_*I*_ know that,_* you*_ know that, and about 99% of the people on this forum know that.

The hard part is convincing the rapidly growing number of sheeple of that.


----------



## deadmoose (Oct 30, 2011)

Sheeple believe the elected because they are in power. They are sheep for a reason. They can't think for themselves. They follow the herd. Under the flawed logic that popular equals right.

History teaches us that our government likes to grow. At the expense of us always. Gun control is control. Look at the NFA 1934. GCA 1968. The "assault weapons" ban. Today's talks. The elected officials aren't as dumb as they sound. They know history. They know what Adolph Hitler was able to accomplish after he disarmed his country. They are truly following his lead into the future as he claimed in the '30's. They have the propaganda that he had. Today it is schools. Tomorrow it may be something different.

Regardless of the propaganda their goals are the same. Create subjects. Expand the "middle class" and eliminate the lower class. Tax the upper class down into the middle class. Basically, they want 2 classes. They have themselves (politicians) in one class. They want the rest of us in the other. They have good government pensions and healthcare separate from the rest of us. They want the rest of us in the same "middle class". They do not think we should be rewarded for hard work. They think instead the more you work and the more you make the more you should give to some lazy POS that CHOOSES not to do anything with his or her life.

There is a reason the USA was on top long ago. We used to be a hard working society. Vietnam and the cold war were fought to end communism (Socialism). Unfortunately, we lost. Socialism is here and the norm.


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)




----------



## deadmoose (Oct 30, 2011)

So PBO came to my college town of Murderapolis. Trying to use it as an example to take guns away from law abiding citizens. He does not however address the demographic of the victims and murderers. He doesn't address the fact that most come from the same couple of Zip codes. And the city has many.

It is a culture problem in the 'hood. How many victims or criminals were ln some form of government support? These statistics are not advertised. But if you watch the news 55411 and 55412 seem to have more murder than all others combined. And then some. Yet he blames the guns.

The community organizer is doing what he does best. Look for a problem to create and find followers.


----------



## rjmoses (Apr 4, 2010)

My son has been mapping shootings and murders in Chicago since January 3rd on this map.

https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=204816672131085362764.0004d4b1343dde780d9e1&msa=0&ll=41.832991%2C-87.641029&spn=0.396756%2C0.229683

Chicago had, until last year when their guns laws were ruled illegal, some of the toughest gun ownership laws in the country If you notice, the majority of the shootings are in black/Hispanic/drug infested/uneducated/gang-ridden neighborhoods.

Makes one wonder, doesn't it?

Ralph


----------

