Another major school shooting today ... Newtown, Conn

@oralloy,

Quote:

Are you contending that harmless cosmetic features like a pistol grip will allow someone to be killed twice?

No, I am contending it is not harmless to think about what your perfect gun grip will be...Rather than the next 8 year old girl who gets a bullet in her chest...

1 Reply

@H2O MAN,

You do realize that not all conservatism are the same? You do find some of them to be retarded don't you? Well guess what? Not all progressives are the same neither no matter how much Rush, Neil, Sean or others tell you.

You do think for yourself don't you?

0 Replies

1 Reply

@oralloy,

what bullshit

1 Reply

@XXSpadeMasterXX,

XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:

oralloy wrote:
Are you contending that harmless cosmetic features like a pistol grip will allow someone to be killed twice?

No, I am contending it is not harmless to think about what your perfect gun grip will be...Rather than the next 8 year old girl who gets a bullet in her chest...

If you want us to stop thinking about our civil rights, you'll first need to stop trying to violate those rights.

1 Reply

@parados,

parados wrote:

Sure.. because Obama is coming to take your guns and you need to be able to shoot the blue helmeted troops he is sending.

Your reason shows a paranoia that doesn't actually fit with reality Finn since no one has talked about banning all shotguns or all pistols or all long rifles.

I wonder if the duck hunters in New York state thought the same thing a couple days ago.

The Freedom Haters are after ALL the guns. Including all the hunting weapons.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

If you want us to stop thinking about our civil rights, you'll first need to stop trying to violate those rights.

No one wants to violate your free rights...We want you to rationalize why someone would NEED an assault weapon...

If your right was violated, or amended...Do less people die? If your right is protected, and not modified...Do more people die?

Why would you not want a modification to protect innocent people?

Who really cares if it is a free right right now or not?

Why do you think that because it is a free law that you NEED one? Whether it is free or not? Why not just hand them over then?

Isn't less people dying...(Including children) more important...than preserving a free law...? So you have to give up your guns...So what? So maybe you save a child's life? Is that more or less important to you than making a statement of being more free?

There is a law that you can not have white Christmas lights on your house if you live in Guildford CT...I believe...

Does it make any sense?

2 Replies

@XXSpadeMasterXX,

XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:

Quote:
If you want us to stop thinking about our civil rights, you'll first need to stop trying to violate those rights.

No one wants to violate your free rights...

Wrong. You are trying to violate my Constitutional rights.

XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:

We want you to rationalize why someone would NEED an assault weapon...

Again, you miss that whole Constitution thing. No American has to justify why they need a gun.

If you want to ban a gun, then YOU need to rationalize why it should be banned.

And you have no justification for banning assault weapons.

XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:

If your right was violated, or amended...Do less people die? If your right is protected, and not modified...Do more people die?

No. Your quest to violate my rights would not save any lives.

You're just trying to violate my rights for the sake of violating my rights.

XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:

Why would you not want a modification to protect innocent people?

Your quest to violate my rights would not save any lives.

You're just trying to violate people's rights for the fun of it.

XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:

Who really cares if it is a free right right now or not?

Me, the NRA, and the Supreme Court.

XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:

Why do you think that because it is a free law that you NEED one?

You must have me confused for a serf.

I'm an American. If I choose to have an assault weapon, I have the right to have one.

"Need" is irrelevant.

XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:

Why not just hand them over then?

Because I will not allow you to violate my rights.

XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:

Isn't less people dying...(Including children) more important...than preserving a free law...?

Again, your quest to violate our rights has nothing to do with saving any life.

XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:

So you have to give up your guns...So what?

I don't have to give up my guns. You have to accept the reality that I have the right to have assault weapons.

XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:

So maybe you save a child's life?

Again, your quest to violate our rights has nothing to do with saving any lives.

3 Replies

@oralloy,

I am not trying to violate your freedom....Again...Just curious if an avid gun carrier would explain their position as to why they would get one? Because I know it is a free law...But never saw a reason to get one myself

2 Replies

@oralloy,

I am all done with this thread...All I wanted to see is if a gun owner would care to explain why they would get one (from their perspective)? You do not wish to explain your personal perspective because it is a free right? Cool with me...You do not have too...I did not come to violate your freedom....

All my questions were hypothetical's...There was no violation...Because I never said you had too...though you do not...I asked, to better understand your personal reasons? If you wanted to explain them...But not, if you did not...And not to tell you, you could not, if you can...

I personally would never get one even though it is a free law...

2 Replies

@XXSpadeMasterXX,

XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:

Just curious if an avid gun carrier would explain their position as to why they would get one?

Some people get them for self defense. Some people get them for hunting (particularly varmint hunting). Some people get them for target shooting.

Actually just pretty much any normal reason to get a gun.

An assault weapon is just a gun with harmless cosmetic features like a pistol grip. So if someone likes pistol grips, whatever reason they choose to get a gun, they may well choose to get a version with a pistol grip on it.

Liking pistol grips, or not liking them, is kind of like liking red or blue. It's just a matter of personal preference.

0 Replies

@XXSpadeMasterXX,

XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:

You do not wish to explain your personal perspective because it is a free right? Cool with me...You do not have too...

I'll explain that. It just looked earlier like you were calling to violate my rights, so I focused on that.

It's mainly a question of cosmetics. If someone likes pistol grips, they are likely to buy a gun with a pistol grip. If they don't like pistol grips, they are likely to buy a gun without them.

The reasons for the getting the gun (hunting, self defense, etc) will be the same regardless of the presence or absence of the pistol grip.

It's like if someone prefers green cars, they are likely to choose a green car. But there is no real difference between a green car and a blue car.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

I'll explain that. It just looked earlier like you were calling to violate my rights, so I focused on that.

I never had an interest in violating anyone's rights...All I wanted to know is, why, if there is a choice...Why someone would "personally" chose to get one? Because they do not have too...

But I think you have explained it...

0 Replies

@XXSpadeMasterXX,

Quote:

It is pretty damn sick that you and H20 and others are not willing to concede there is no reason to have an assault weapon...Just because the Constitution allows it...

What do you plan to do if someone actually breaks into your home? Kill them twice? Gimme a break...

This garbage is a reason why millions can't sleep at night...And your only alternative is to buy a bigger gun...? Who wins? The first to get their hands on a WMD?

First in a nation of 300 millions only about 300 a year are killed by any rifle of any type.

Next you perhaps miss the fact on this thread that so call assault rifles are on the low end not the high end of killing power when it come to all rifles?

That there are far far more deadly hunting rifles that can engage and killed with one shot large game animals at a range up to 2000 yards where the so call assault rifles are design for an engagement envelope of 300 yards with a round that is not powerful enough to even go deer hunting?

Unless you are planning on hiking with a hundred pounds of equipments on your back all day and then fight a battle where ever oz of weight count so a combination of a light rifle and light bullets are important it is hardly the best killing tool.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

One more safety rule do not put your finger inside the trigger guard of a gun unless you are ready to shot it.

1 Reply

@XXSpadeMasterXX,

Quote:

We want you to rationalize why someone would NEED an assault weapon...

As most rifles are more deadly then so call assault rifles then why would anyone need any rifle is that your question as there is no logical reason to picked out rifles label assault rifles and ban them over the other types of rifles many with far more killing power and range.

0 Replies

@XXSpadeMasterXX,

Quote:

All I wanted to see is if a gun owner would care to explain why they would get one (from their perspective)?

Let see I am a handgun and shotgun person myself but reasons to buy such a rifle would be they look sharp as hell, the rounds are more common then some other rifles and therefore cheaper and for target shooting that is very important. Oh the rifles are not all that costly either at least until the anti-gun nuts had driven up the demand and the price.

They are light weight if you are hiking the woods hunting for small game.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

What about people who have an Order of Protection lodged against them?

Should they be allowed to purchase a gun?

Do you know how often guns are used to shoot the partner or spouse in an act of domestic violence--and that spouse/partner victim is usually female.

Quote:

Number of U.S. troops killed in Afghanistan and Iraq: 6,614:

Number of women, in the same period, killed as the result of domestic violence in the US: 11,766

Increase in likelihood that a woman will die a violent death if a gun in present in the home: 270 percent
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/soraya-chemaly/50-actual-facts-about-dom_b_2193904.html

Quote:

Access to firearms yields a more than five-fold increase in risk of intimate partner homicide when considering other factors of abuse, according to a recent study, suggesting that abusers who possess guns tend to inflict the most severe abuse on their partners.

Jacquelyn C. Campbell et al., Risk Factors For Femicide in Abusive Relationships: Results From A Multi-Site Case Control Study, 93 Am. J. of Public Health 1089, 1092 (2003), abstract available at http://www.ajph.org/cgi/content/abstract/93/7/1089

Of females killed with a firearm, almost two-thirds were killed by their intimate partners. The number of females shot and killed by their husband or intimate partner was more than three times higher than the total number murdered by male strangers using all weapons combined in single victim/single offender incidents in 2002.

The Violence Pol'y Ctr., When Men Murder Women: An Analysis of 2002 Homicide Data: Females Murdered by Males in Single Victim/Single Offender Incidents, at 7 (2004), available at http://www.vpc.org/studies/wmmw2004.pdf

http://www.americanbar.org/groups/domestic_violence/resources/statistics.html

2 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

izzythepush wrote:

I think the fact that only 4.7 million households in America can watch Al Jazeera speaks volumes.

And for alien visitation nuts, a dead cow with a perfectly excised anus also speaks volumes.

I'm really not too sure what you mean by that, but you're a prime example of wilful ignorance. You want the world to be a certain way, and lie to yourself so you don't have to face facts. As Beth pointed out, Fascist dictatorships aside, America does have the most right wing Media in the developed world, and Al Jazeera is a very good news organisation that manages to shine a light on those parts of the world that western Media outlets ignore or neglect.

It's comforting to tell yourself that there's a Liberal Media bias, and that Al Jazeera is a terrorist's broadcaster so you don't have to deal with reality. It's a shame, because unlike Oralboy and Mr. Soggy you actually have a brain, so try using it for a change.

Btw shotgun licences aren't that hard to get hold of over here despite all the nonsense that's been bandied about by your right wing news organisations.

0 Replies

@XXSpadeMasterXX,

XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:

I am not trying to violate your freedom

Oralboy likes to throw the word freedom around, but he doesn't appreciate it. His idea of freedom is the freedom to torture anyone who critices the NRA, Mr. Soggy refers to democracy as mob rule.

Fascists all over talk about freedom as if it's something to cherish, but in reality they think it's something that should only be enjoyed by other fascists, in Germany it's being used to herald the rise of neo Nazis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Freedom_Party

1 Reply

Another major school shooting today ... Newtown, Conn

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know