2
   

Ban "Cop Killer" Assault Pistol

 
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Mar, 2005 04:23 pm
Hardly. I keep them for hunting, shooting sports, varmint eradication, and just plinking, besides protection. But that's not what the 2nd amendmend is about.
0 Replies
 
Swift
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Mar, 2005 04:36 pm
I hunt with mine and they are fun just to shoot at shooting ranges!
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Mar, 2005 04:38 pm
I keep mine near the front door just to protect myself from missionaries.
0 Replies
 
Swift
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Mar, 2005 04:39 pm
oh no lol
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Mar, 2005 04:46 pm
cjhsa/ Swift
That is of course why people have guns. The pap that more than a few have tried to sell, for protection against our government and an invading force is, to put it politely, a load of crap.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Mar, 2005 04:49 pm
what is a pap?
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Mar, 2005 04:52 pm
pap=Material lacking real value or substance.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Mar, 2005 04:55 pm
Ivory Fury
Why do you own a gun or guns. It it to protect against the governments tyranny or a foreign invader?
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Mar, 2005 04:58 pm
Well, Craven, last I knew, was trying to purchase nuclear weapons for his personal arsenal. Laughing
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Mar, 2005 05:07 pm
cjhsa

Forget about craven and think about the people on the terror alert list who were, almost to a man, to purchase weapons legally in the US. That revelation was in the news several days ago. I guess they are in a militia. Just not ours.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Mar, 2005 05:08 pm
Pap must equate to persiflage and piffle?
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Mar, 2005 05:09 pm
pablum
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Mar, 2005 05:14 pm
paplum?

pifflum?

persa NO NEVER
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Mar, 2005 05:17 pm
Roger
Try Bull S***.
0 Replies
 
Ivory Fury
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Mar, 2005 07:20 pm
.
AU these short little scornful quips you're giving don't really pass as an argument.

As a civilian, I keep guns for some of the same reasons I wear a seat belt, you hope nothing happens that would warrant its' use, but just in case, its' there should you need it.

It is my civic duty to be armed. I do not keep them to protect myself from government whether it be foreign or domestic. We're far too stable and far too powerful to ever face domestic or foreign military as civilians in this generation and probably a couple of generations after us. But I keep the tradition and shall fight for 2nd Amendment rights so that it will exist in the generations to come and they will be ready for darker times which are inevitable.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Mar, 2005 03:09 am
au1929 wrote:
Forget about craven and think about the people on the terror alert list who were, almost to a man, to purchase weapons legally in the US. That revelation was in the news several days ago. I guess they are in a militia. Just not ours.

I think that's a good point, but what would change if purchasing weapons was made illegal? People on the terror alert list will still have the criminal energy to buy them illegally or make them themselves. Just to give you an impression how easy that is: The original Uzi machine pistol was hand-made by an inmate of an Israeli prison, using parts of the prison cell's metal furniture. (I never found out how Mr. Uzi made his ammunition that way.) Only the law abiding citizens will stop owning arms. It's as dyslexia said: if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will continue to own them.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Mar, 2005 03:17 am
[Could it be, Thomas, that you report an urban legend about "Mr. Uzi"? Biography Uziel (Uzi) Gal, born Gothard Glas.]
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Mar, 2005 04:23 am
Walter Hinteler wrote:
[Could it be, Thomas, that you report an urban legend about "Mr. Uzi"? Biography Uziel (Uzi) Gal, born Gothard Glas.]

It's possible -- your quote certainly suggests that Mr. Uzi finished his prototype after he got released from prison, and it doesn't say whether he had a usable gun while in prison.

Quote:
After graduation, he joined the Palmach (underground infantry forces of the Hagana) and specialized in weapons maintenance. In 1943 he was arrested by British forces (who ruled Israel until 1948) after being caught with a gun, and was sentenced to six years in prison. After over two years in prison he was pardoned and returned to Yagur in 1946.

During the 1948 war of Independence, Uzi participated in several battles in northern Israel. After the state of Israel was established in May 1948, he was sent to an officer-training course, and while there, demonstrated the submachine gun prototype he had developed on his own in Yagur. Uzi was sent to work at the Israel Military Industries to continue developing the gun. After over two years of development and modifications, The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) adopted the new weapon as its official submachine gun and named it <i>UZI</i>, after its developer, despite Uzi's protest.

But even if we follow this version of the story, it still supports the point I was trying to make. It demonstrates that a competent tinkerer can build a prototype machine gun on his own if he wants to. Making a gun isn't rocket science. And even if it's illegal, a criminal with sufficient energy will always be able to get one somehow. It is the law-abiding citizens, not criminals, who are most strongly affected by prohibitions against guns. Remember how, after the massacre in Columbine, CO, several pundids here in Germany boasted that this thing "couldn't happen here" because we, unlike the United States, are a civilized country and have tough gun control? Remember how we experienced a very similar high school massacre in Erfurt a few years later? Remember how after this massacre, which was followed by several smaller ones, nobody here ever asked whether Germany's rationale for its stricter gun control was based on unrealistic expectations?
0 Replies
 
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Mar, 2005 04:48 am
bookmark
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Mar, 2005 06:50 am
Thomas wrote:
I think we should encourage more average Americans to possess guns, not discourage them.

au1929 wrote:
Thomas
More guns in the hands of irresponsible American's heaven forbid.

Unsurprisingly, I agree with Au. The "law-abiding citizens" thing, that suggests that proliferating guns are no problem as long as its just the average, normal, law-abiding gentlefolk that have them is IMO a red herring. The series of school shootings that have rocked America were done by the children of exactly such law-abiding, average gentlefolk.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/01/2024 at 09:23:28