Another major school shooting today ... Newtown, Conn

@Setanta,

Hear yourself talk wheezily, limp dick. My comment was perfectly in context with your comment. Old man, has it become too fuzzy in the head for you to comprehend english. Anyway who runs the congress? Say louder old man. Yes that's right, politicians. That includes idiotic politicians like Dianne Feinstein. That bill won't "work" because the GOP-led Congress (with a strong right-wing contingent) would never pass it...and she probably knows this. Given the powerful gun lobby, it probably won't even make it out of the Senate.

1 Reply

@McTag,

McTag wrote:

Deciding whether ordinary people in the USA should be entrusted
with some or all guns, it seems like some sanity is beginning to dawn.

The decision to entrust Americans with arms was made long ago and it was put in
writing when this constitutional republic was founded... a right that shall not be infringed.

As the sun sets Americans are questioning the motives of politicians they voted into office...
ordinary people wonder if they have entrusted politicians with far too much power.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

You haven't demonstrated that a ban on assault weapons would not be made on a rational basis.

Sure I have. There is no legitimate reason for banning harmless cosmetic features like a pistol grip. That makes any ban of such harmless features a violation of Rational Basis Review.

Setanta wrote:

Do you run over the NRA website to pick up this lame propaganda?

Our nation's fundamental legal principles are lame propaganda?

1 Reply

@Val Killmore,

No, it was a flagrant straw man, complete with irrational flings about Columbine, which had nothing to do with a discussion of the constitutionality of the regulation of firearms by Congress. I've already said, dip ****, that such a bill very likely would not make it out of the Congress. You must be too f*cking stupid to pay attention.

You become more and more irrational as this progresses. Have fun playing with yourself, ass wipe--i won't be playing your stupid games any longer.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

I like my Congressman. But if the NRA asks me to, I will devote the rest of my life to getting him voted out of office.

There are a LOT of people just like me. We all like our Congressmen. We'll all devote our lives to getting our Congressmen voted out of office if the NRA asks us to.

Do you realize what a mindless automaton you sound like?

And if there are a lot of people just like you, we really do need to talk about providing better mental heath care in this country--you are just plain nuts.

For someone who keeps celebrating his "freedom" you certainly seem ready to renounce it, along with your capacity for independent and rational thought, to prove your devotion to your demi-god, the NRA. And, if they tell you to drink their poisonous KoolAid, I'm sure you would make sure you down every last drop.

In your evangelical zeal for the NRA, and your narrowly conceived 2nd Amendment pronouncements, you increasingly remind me of jgoldman10 and his brand of Bible thumping, oralloy--and you are just as incessant, and repetitive, and shallow, and deaf, and unreasonable, and rigidly encapsulated as he was. Have you ever thought of creating your own comic book to proselytize your devotion to the NRA?

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

No, it was a flagrant straw man, complete with irrational flings about Columbine, which had nothing to do with a discussion of the constitutionality of the regulation of firearms by Congress.

Strawman? Read again what you wrote dip ****.

Setanta wrote:

Congress can ban assault rifles, and so can the states.

And me not disagreeing with you but just making a comment about how the previous AWB that was setup to deter gun violence, and then the columbine happening is a strawman? I was making a point about the application of such legislation in to the reality, and to prove my point that the expired AWB was a meaningless piece of legislation.

Setanta wrote:

You become more and more irrational as this progresses. Have fun playing with yourself, ass wipe--i won't be playing your stupid games any longer.

On the contrary I'm just correcting your idiocy. Someone has to pick up the pieces of lies and idiocy and to show the light at the end of the tunnel. Just leave it to me old man, I'm here for you if you ever need my help again.

0 Replies

@firefly,

firefly wrote:

oralloy wrote:
I like my Congressman. But if the NRA asks me to, I will devote the rest of my life to getting him voted out of office.

There are a LOT of people just like me. We all like our Congressmen. We'll all devote our lives to getting our Congressmen voted out of office if the NRA asks us to.

Do you realize what a mindless automaton you sound like?

And if there are a lot of people just like you, we really do need to talk about providing better mental heath care in this country--you are just plain nuts.

For someone who keeps celebrating his "freedom" you certainly seem ready to renounce it, along with your capacity for independent and rational thought, to prove your devotion to your demi-god, the NRA. And, if they tell you to drink their poisonous KoolAid, I'm sure you would make sure you down every last drop.

In your evangelical zeal for the NRA, and your narrowly conceived 2nd Amendment pronouncements, you increasingly remind me of jgoldman10 and his brand of Bible thumping, oralloy--and you are just as incessant, and repetitive, and shallow, and deaf, and unreasonable, and rigidly encapsulated as he was. Have you ever thought of creating your own comic book to proselytize your devotion to the NRA?

If the NRA asks me to devote my life to getting my Congressman voted out of office, I will do so. You will not be able to stop me.

I do not anticipate such a request coming. The House Democrats are not even going to try a ban on assault weapons. The fight will be over magazine limits alone.

But I'm at the ready if the NRA needs me.

0 Replies

@RexRed,

Quote:

Colbert Defends NRA's Gun Control Backlash (VIDEO)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/10/colbert-defends-nras-gun-control-backlash_n_2448529.html

Just bumping this Rex because it was pretty cool. Touches on the 'judging guns by how they look' and the contributing factors of violent movies and video games. Highly recommended.

0 Replies

I've often wondered if when amendments are made to the constitution there is vigorous yelling that changing the constitution is unconstitutional. It seems like the US has many amendments, and that the amendments are more sacred than the constitution itself - of course, I am speaking as an ignorant furr'ner.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

Sure I have. There is no legitimate reason for banning harmless cosmetic features like a pistol grip. That makes any ban of such harmless features a violation of Rational Basis Review.

What get me is these fools does not seems to be able to understand that so call military rounds/rifles and so call civilian assault rifles are one hell of a lot less powerful then the modem heavy hunting rifles and the rounds they employed.

That weight and the ability to hike around the country sides with all the gears and the normal ammo load out means the having a light rifle and small caliber ammunition is more important then having the most powerful killing tool.

A WW1 repeat a WW1 BAR [rifle] is far more powerful then an M16 however the weight of the BAR and the weight of the rounds it employ mean it is not the idea weapon on the battlefield.

Still if you turn mass killers away from so call assault rifles you are in reality likely moving them toward far more deadly weapons.

2 Replies

@hingehead,

I did so, too. And I'm wondering additionally about the fantasy that society is made up of clearly distinguishable "good guys" and "bad guys". Which is something the NRA and the gun lovers here fervently want us to believe.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Nobody is trying to convince you or anyone else that society is
made up of clearly distinguishable "good guys" and "bad guys".

I'm wondering how long you have been seeing black helicopters
and when was the first time you were anally probed by aliens?

0 Replies

@hingehead,

Without for a moment subscribing to some of the incredible stupidity displayed here, the first ten amendments are fairly more significant to people than the seventeen amendments which succeeded them. When the constitution was sent out for ratification, one of the strongest objects was that there was no enumeration of individual rights. So the Federalists said that creating a bill of rights would be the first order of business. It was, too. The First Congress sent twelve proposed amendments to the states. The last ten of those twelve were ratified and became known as the bill of rights. Monomaniacs such as the gun lobby often have hazy notions of those ten amendments at best, but they obsess on the second amendment.

Of those original twelve proposed amendments, sent out in 1789, one of them, now the 27th amendment, was ratified 203 yars later, in 1992. It's one of my favorites, and probably the most ignored of all the amendments.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Still if you turn mass killers away from so call assault rifles you
are in reality likely moving them toward far more deadly weapons.

Not 'more deadly' but, there are many small arms that are quite capable of turning 'cover' (hiding behind a car) into
just 'concealment' (projectile passes through car... hits hidden target). The .223 AR is not shooting through cars.

Danny Vermin's .88 Magnum

It was made for him special. It "shoots through schools," as Vermin puts.
It can shoot through armor, the victim, and a tree outside, presumably
with a single shot, although it failed to penetrate Johnny's cigarette case
at the end of the film.

1 Reply

@H2O MAN,

Quote:

Not 'more deadly' but, there are many small arms that are quite capable of turning 'cover' (hiding behind a car) into
just 'concealment' (projectile passes through car... hits hidden target). The .223 AR is not shooting through cars.

Here is a picture of what a few BARs can do to an old car with far heavy metal shell then modern cars.

No assault rifle or current military M16 could come near that kind of damage.

Hate to think what that kind of large caliber round that can go through that amount of heavy metal would do to children.

http://texashideout.tripod.com/Bonnie_Clyde_Car_1.jpg

0 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

What get me is these fools does not seems to be able to understand that so call military rounds/rifles and so call civilian assault rifles are one hell of a lot less powerful then the modem heavy hunting rifles and the rounds they employed.

Yes. If we get a 10 round magazine limit, I'm expecting the .223 to lose favor as a self defense round.

It'll still be popular with people who want to shoot at gophers/foxes/coyotes, but I'm thinking there will be a big shift to the .308 for fending off humans.

And if anyone misses the light recoil of the .223, all they need to do is re-barrel their .308 to .260 Remington:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.260_Remington

It's based on the .308 necked down to 6.5mm, so it should be an easy swap.

The round is similar to the .30-30 both in recoil and killing power. Plus, its sectional density is nearly magical. A .30-cal round would need 190 grains to match the same sectional density as a 140 grain round in .260 Remington.

If you're going to be fending off other humans, 10 rounds of either .308 or .260 will do you a lot better than 10 rounds of .223.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

BillRM wrote:
What get me is these fools does not seems to be able to understand that so call military rounds/rifles and so call civilian assault rifles are one hell of a lot less powerful then the modem heavy hunting rifles and the rounds they employed.

Yes. If we get a 10-round magazine limit, I'm expecting the .223 to lose favor as a self-defense round.

It'll still be popular with people who want to shoot at gophers/foxes/coyotes, but I'm thinking there will be a big shift to the .308 for fending off humans.

I made that shift years ago... most of my rifles are .308/7.62mm

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Thanks Set for a clear explanation. The constitution does seem to bog down in mechanics sometimes (but I'm looking at from a 21st century management perspective - highly irrelevant).

I just looked up the 27th - can I assume you like it because it's like a self-checking system - in that if you vote for your pay raise you don't actually get it until the electorate has a chance to say whether they think you deserve it? Sort of built in accountability?

0 Replies

Mother who sued for right to carry a gun at kid's sporting events found murdered

Quote:

In 2008 Meleanie Hain became famous for her enthusiastic support of gun rights, so much so that she carried a handgun to her children's athletic events, and she possessed an open carry permit to do so. The local police revoked her permit, which she appealed and had reversed. The judge on the case said that she "scared the devil" out of people. Now, 4 years later, Meleanie Hain, 31, and her husband, Scott Hain, 33, are both dead in a murder / suicide tragedy.

Police are not pursuing any other possibilities or motives and are instead ruling this a "death investigation."

The shooting began at nearly 9 p.m. on Jan. 9. in Lebanon, Pennsylvania. Scott Hain held a gun to his wife's head and pulled the trigger, and moments later turned the weapon on himself.

2 Replies

@jcboy,

Have you seen any stories about black Americans killing black Americans with handguns?

Have you ever posted those stories here?

0 Replies

Another major school shooting today ... Newtown, Conn

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know